A Study of the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture

Western Michigan UniversityScholarWorks at WMU

Dissertations Graduate College

4-2004

A Study of the Relationship betweenTransformational Leadership and OrganizationalCultureMildred Patricia HowardWestern Michigan University

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations

Part of the Physics Commons

This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free and open accessby the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted forinclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorksat WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Recommended CitationHoward, Mildred Patricia, "A Study of the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture" (2004).Dissertations. 1108.https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1108

http://scholarworks.wmich.edu?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages


https://scholarworks.wmich.edu?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/grad?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/193?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/1108?utm_source=scholarworks.wmich.edu%2Fdissertations%2F1108&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]



A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSFORMATIONALLEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

by

Mildred Patricia Howard

A Dissertation Submitted to the

Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fiilfillment of the

requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education

Department of Teaching, Learning and Leadership

Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan

April 2004

R eproduced with perm ission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.

A STUDY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRANSFORMATIONALLEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Mildred Patricia Howard, Ed. D.

Western Michigan University, 2004

The research study examines teachers’ perspectives on leadership and

organizational culture in elementary schools within the state of Michigan. 121 teachers

responded to more than 90 survey questions from the Leadersliip Practices Inventory and

the Instructional Climate Inventory. The purposes of the study were to determine (a)

whether the school size was related to variations in transformational leadership and

organizational culture, and (b) the relationship between transformational leadership and

organizational culture. Statistical tests used to determine possible relationships include F-

Tests, T-Test and Canonical Correlations.

The author found the following; (a) Teachers’ mean scores were moderately high

regarding principals’ leadership. Post Hoc comparisons indicate that essentially small

schools, which tended to have lower means, differed from large and medium sized

schools, (b) Teachers also gave moderately high mean ratings regarding school culture.

Based on the F-Test, size was not related to the teachers’ perception of culture. There was

a homogenization in their perceptions; and (c) Canonical correlations analysis indicated

that higher teacher ratings on three cultural elements (recognition, affiliation and

accomplishment) tended to be associated with higher ratings on principal’s

transformational leadership. The analysis provides evidence that there is a relationship

between organizational culture and leadership.


UMI Number: 3124535

Copyright 2004 by

Howard, Mildred Patricia

All rights reserved.

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper

alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

UMIUMI Microform 3124535

Copyright 2004 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346


Copyright by Mildred Patricia Howard

2004


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

With enduring gratitude, the author, acknowledges the support and assistance

of some very special people who made the completion of this degree a reality. They

are the following:

Dr. Mary Ann Dipierro, a genuine friend, who provided practical advice,

guidance and emotional support.

Committee members: Dr. Warfield, Chair; Dr. Jianping Shen; and Dr. Joseph

Morris for their commitment and expertise.

Parents who taught all of their children to value the privilege and the pursuit

of an education, father, Hoyt Milton Kendrick and mother, Pauline Rhodes Kendrick.

Sisters: Madeline K. Melton, Paula K. Morning, and Marie K. Harrell for their

solidarity.

Marvelous husband, George E. Howard, Jr., children, James Edward and

Kendra Elise-Nicole for their love and never complaining.

Betrothed family, the Howards, for their unwavering support.

Lastly, to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, the guiding force that sustained

me throughout this process.

Mildred Patricia Howard

11


TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS..................................................................................... ii

LIST OF TABLES................................................................................................. ix

LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................ x

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION................................................................................ 1

Overview of the Problem.................................................................... 1

Changing Demographics.............................. 3

Lack of Support and Isolation for Teachers................................ 5

Management of Discipline and Behavior Problems................... 6

Possible Effects on Teachers.............................................................. 8

Low Teacher Morale................................................................... 8

T eacher Absenteeism.................................................................. 10

High Teacher Turn-Over and Attrition....................................... 11

Purpose of the Study........................................................................... 15

Research Questions............................................................................ 19

Conceptual Hypotheses............................................................... 19

Operationalized Hypotheses....................................................... 20

Null Hypothesis........................................................................ 20

Overview of the Dissertation.............................................................. 20

Visual Conceptual Overview.............................................................. 21

n. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE....................................................... 25

111


Table of Contents—continued

CHAPTER

Overview.............................................................................................. 25

Qualities of Principals as Leaders...................................................... 25

Goal Strategist............................................................................. 25

Multi-Dimensional and Multi-Strategic Qualities...................... 27

Caring Leadership Qualities........................................................ 29

The Relationship Between Leadership Style and Organizational Culture .................................................................................... 30

Leadership Built on Trust with Freedom to Explore Ideas without Reprisals ...................................................................... 31

Programmed Approach to Leadership with Restrictions 34

Responsive Leadership that Is Interpersonal and Enhances Understanding and Satisfaction.................................................. 36

Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture................. 39

Descriptions of Each and Implications Resulting from Their Combination................ 39

Meeting the Needs of Individuals within the Culture................. 42

The Strength of Transformational Leadership in the Organizational Culture................................................................ 46

Renewed Commitment through Reassessment........................... 49

Receptivity to Transformational Leadership Change.................. 52

Subsets of Transformafresrt .Leadership..................................... 54

Overview............................................................................. 54

SOMienging the Process...................... 55

fespiring a Shared Vision..................... 56

IV



CHAPTER

Enabling Others to Act.............................................. 57

Modeling the Way..................................................... 59

Encouraging the Heart.............................................. 59

The Relationship Between Size of the Group and theOrganizational Perception of Leadership........................................... 60

The Relationship Between Size of the Group or Organization and Organizational Culture....................................................................... 62

m. METHODOLOGY............................................................................... 65

Subjects.............................................................................................. 65

Instrumentation................................................................................... 67

Leadership Practices Inventory................................................... 67

The Instructional Climate Inventory........................................... 68

Measurement...................................................................................... 69

Leadership Practices Inventory................................................... 69

The Instructional Climate Inventory........................................... 70

Data Collection Procedure.................................................................. 73

Data Analysis...................................................................................... 75

Overview..................................................................................... 75

Question # I .......................................................................... 75

Question #2............................................... 76

Question #3.......................................................................... 76

IV. DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS...................................... 79

V



CHAPTERPurpose................................................................................................ 79

Sample Description............................................................................ 79

Instruments......................................................................................... 80

Rate of Sample Return/Response....................................................... 80

The Relationship Between Teacher’s Perceptions of Leadershipand the School Size............................................................................ 81

Question#!................................................................................. 81

Basic Statistics for the Subscale and Composite for the Leadership............................................................................ 81

Practice Inventory....................................................... 81

Comparing Across Schools at Different Sizes..................... 83

Pairwise Comparisons......................................................... 84

The Relationship Between Teacher’s Perceptions of Culture (Composite and Subscales) and the School Size................................ 87

Questions #2................................................................................ 87

Basic Statistics for Organizational Culture.......................... 87

Comparing Schools of Various Sizes.................................. 87

The Relationship Between Leadership Subscales and Culture Subscales............................................................................................ 89

Question #3................................................................................. 89

Summary of the Questions & Responses........................................... 91

Question#!................................................................................. 91

Question #2................................................................................. 92

Question #3................................................................................. 92

VI


Table of Contents—eontinued

CHAPTER

V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, STRENGTHS ANDLIMITATIONS.................................................................................... 94

Summary and Interpretations............................................................... 94

Summary..................................................................................... 94

The Study............................................................................. 94

The Findings........................................................................ 96

Research Question No. 1 ............................................. 96



Discussion............................................................................................ 98

Strengths and Limitations.................................................................... 100

Strengths............................ 100

Limitations.......................................................................... 101

REFERENCES........................................................................................ 102

APPENDICES

A. PERMISSION TO USE THE LPI............................................................ 114

B. MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION (MEA)INSTRUCTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (PDI) CONFERENCE EXHIBITOR’S LETTER............... 116

C. PROMOTION FLYER FOR RAFFLE PRIZES....................................... 118

D. HSIRB APPROVAL #1............................................................................ 120

E. HSIRB APPROVAL #2............................................................................ 122

F. HSIRB APPROVAL #3............................................................................ 124

V ll



APPENDICES

G. LEADERSHIP PRACTICES INVENTORY (LPI)................................... 126

H. INSTRUCTIONAL CLIMATE INVENTORY......................................... 129

Vlll


LIST OF TABLES

1. Descriptive Statistics for Transformational Leadership Subscale Scores 82

2. Summary of F-test Results for Comparing School Sizes in Terms of theLeadership Practices Inventory (LPI) Subscale and Composite Scores 83

2a. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Challenging the Process (cproc)Subscale......................................................................................................... 84

2b. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Inspiring a Shared Vision (vision)Subscale......................................................................................................... 85

2c. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Modeling the Way Subscale................. 85

2d. Post Hoc T-Test for the Leadership Composite...................... 86

3. Descriptive Statistics for Organizational Culture Subscale Scores.............. 88

4. Summary of F-Test Results for Comparing School Sizes in Terms of theOrganizational Culture Subscale Variables................................................... 88

5. Canonical Correlation between Leadership and Organizational Culture 91

IX


LIST OF FIGURES

1. Visual Overview Conceptualization ............................................... 23

2. Major Variables and Their Subscales........................................................... 24

X


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Failure to implement the transformational leadership model in the edueational

system has had a negative impaet on the edueational proeess. By Transformational

Leadership is meant an approaeh that allows leaders and teaehers to work to aceomplish

quality goals without foeusing on individuals’ rank and one that eonsiders the worth,

eoncems, needs and humanity of the individual partieipant. Transformational leadership

is a type of edueational leadership style. Edueational style and organizational eulture are

eomplimentary. They oeeur within the same setting. In understanding or defining

leadership style, it might be considered a balance between style and organizational

eulture. There would seem to be a symbiotic relationship; they generate and infuse the

other. They both have a bearing on teachers’ perceptions and necessarily on students as

part of the environment through which teaehers move. Therefore, they can be said to

impact education.

Overview of the Problem

Since A Nation at Risk in the 1980’s, orchestrated by the National Commission

on Excellence in Education, there have been concerns raised to a national level about

public education (Owens, 1991). Over the years. United States history has repeatedly

focused on education. Many presidents since Ronald Reagan and A Nation at Risk and

even some before have addressed education as an important national issue or as part of

their political platform (Clinton, 1996; Ford, 1976). President Gerald Ford (1976)

1


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

discussed federal education programs in his comments on the role of education in our

nation’s progress for the future. Education goals were also set by state govemors under

the leadership of President Bush. In 1989 he and 50 state govemors set educational goals

for the nation at an Educational Summit in Charlottesville, Virginia (National Education

Goals Panel, 1992). President Clinton discussed the need for setting standards to insure

the improvement of education at a National Summit on Education (Clinton, 1996).

Baker and Smith (1997) reveal the lengthy concerns about education over

multiple decades concerning American students and their academic performance. They

reveal that over the past 30 years major intemational studies in math and science have all

included U.S. students. Findings support mediocre performance in relation to students in

other developed countries.

In spite of the creation of initiatives and summits resulting from the 1980 National

Commission on Excellence in Education, problems remain. Owens (1991) reported that

recommendations that followed the 1980 Commission were felt to have few promising

initiatives. A Nation Still at Risk in 1999 focuses on some of the problematic factors

remaining in education today (A Nation Still at Risk, 1999). Many problems and

concerns exist today that continue to present challenges for teachers. These include

changing demographics, teacher isolation, lack of support, student discipline and

behavior problems (Vandehey, 1981; Klauke, 1989; Connolly, 1995; Slater, 1980;

Harris, 1998; Frantz, 1994).

The effects of these problems may contribute to low teacher morale, teacher

absenteeism and teacher attrition. School problems and their effects reflect aspects of a


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AN D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

schools’ culture. Learning about the culture of schools is important toward understanding

the dynamics of what goes on within schools.

Transformational leadership may be the answer to some of the problems in

education today. Furthermore, the interplay between characteristics of transformational

leadership and specific aspects of organizational culture may reveal interesting findings.

Because teachers work closely with the school leadership and students, their perceptions

are vital to the acquisition of information and will be utilized ostensibly throughout this

study. The problem of changing demographics, isolation, lack of support and behavior

issues will be discussed, followed by a discussion of effects of these problems including

low teacher morale, teacher absenteeism, teacher turnover and attrition.

Changing Demographics

Today many teachers must be equipped to work with students from a variety of

backgrounds. Teachers must meet the needs of students reflected by changing

demographics (Vandehey, 1981). Understanding some of the implications of population

changes both locally and nationally is important because educators are serving

communities that are rapidly changing. Klauke (1989) reveals a shift in the cultural

make-up of student enrollment that will call for the educational environment to address

issues brought about by the change. Suggestions are made for educators to become

aware through investigative procedures of ways to meet the educational needs of their

changing constituency. The changing demographics as a result of the national population

distribution shifts with migration, immigration and fertility pattems challenge the country

to begin living as multicultural citizenry (Klauke, 1989).



Our changing population is reflected in many ways. By the year 2010,38% of

young people under the age of 18 will be African, Asian or Hispanic American. The rise

of children growing up in single parent homes, as well as other conditions that are

prevalent, cause or are associated with an increasing number of children to be labeled “at

risk” (Klauke, 1989). The number of public school enrollees will also be affected by the

availability of various types of schooling. Private schools are readily available in most

towns with a population size of 10,000 (Klauke, 1989).

According to Snyder (1984) and Hodgkinson (1989) school districts might assist

students by helping with a cluster of services involving health, education, transportation

and other needs. Changing demograhics may be observed in rural schools where

immigrants and minority groups have helped contribute to the overall growth of the

population. Situations like these may necessitate educators evaluating the need to

consider providing instruction in English as a second language for individuals who have

recently immigrated (Huang, 1999).

Lankard (1994) communicates the challenge to educators as they increasingly

work with multicultural populations. Strategies/techniques proposed for usage are many.

Among them are nurturing students’ respect and consideration for other viewpoints and

the development of critical thinking (Wood, 1993; Fried, 1993). Based on another recent

study, new and not so new teachers face a variety of challenging conditions that may

include among other concerns, multilingual student populations and students with

disabilities (Haselkom, 1994).


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSfflP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

Lack of Support and Isolation of Teachers

While shifting demographics may be a more recent problem, some problems have

existed for teachers over the years. Lack of support is a problem that teachers sometimes

face. For the purpose of this paper lack of support will be defined as feeling alone or

isolated in the performance of the work task. Support may come in many different forms

including collegial, community, parental, or administrative. However, according to many

authors, teacher isolation and lack of collegial and administrative support are conditions

that teachers must confront (Connolly, 1995; Akuchie, 1986; Burch, 1993; Harris, 1998;

Slater, 1980; Ulriksen, 1996).

Feelings of support may be linked to other more long-term consequences. In some

studies involving teachers and attrition, there was found to be a positive correlation

between teachers staying in the profession and having more support from the

administration ( Bobbitt, et al., 1991; Metzke, 1989). Feelings and perceptions of being

supported may come in various forms including having the administration listen to

concerns or consider ideas or solutions for problems or simply being acknowledged as a

participant In a recent study, Marlow, Inman, and Betancourt-Smith (1997) described

support systems studied for new teachers. The sources of support included colleagues,

administration and community. The areas of support were directly related to the teacher’s

level of comfort and the desire to continue in the profession.

Support from colleagues, or administrators could specifically be built upon

sharing ideas and open communication. Marlow, et al. (1997) reveal that sharing of ideas

and plans in problem solving are purported by fellow teachers as resulting in less feelings

of isolation. Teachers asserted that increased isolation were linked to feelings of


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSfflP AN D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

nonsupport. Bacharach and others (1986) in a survey study of 1789 elementary and

secondary teachers found that teachers desired more frequent communication and

perceived that administrators did not display supportive characteristics. Support issues

were some of the circumstances associated with stress in a study of 223 elementary

teachers in Colorado. Teachers reported feeling less productive while under stress and

utilized social support as a coping mechanism for stress (French, 1987).

Lack of support might have far reaching ramifications. Laub (1998) identified

reducing isolation among colleagues as a method to maintain qualified staffs in education

and prevent potential or eventual bumout. Further, this study revealed the need to address

the issue of collegial isolation because of large numbers of teachers retiring and new

capable staff who need to be maintained. The need for the support of teachers surpasses

individual difficulties. Indeed, the lack of support might impact the whole profession.

Simon (1980) discussed the self-contained condition and the isolated nature of

elementary teacher’s work settings. The isolation from other teachers, parents and

principals characterizes the school day and results/produces certain relationships.

Suggestions for training teaehers is an aspect that should be looked at to help alleviate

isolation.

Management of Discipline and Behavior Problems

Discipline may be defined in a number of ways. Concern about how to discipline

students and behavior problems have existed in the past, and they exist in schools today.

For the purpose of this study, discipline will be defined as the remedy for problem

behaviors. Student behavior problems will be described as anything that impedes or



prevents the teacher from performing his or her teaching responsibilities. Discipline and

behavior problems are often cited as concerns for teachers in the profession (Harris,

1998; Frantz, 1994; Slater, 1980; Crum-mack, 1993). Pellicer (1984) in discussing

behavior problems suggested teacher /administrative relationships might be helped by

addressing behavior problems.

In addition to strengthening the teacher/administrator relationship, knowledge of

techniques and developing skills may need increasing and upgrading. In some situations,

problems with discipline and behavior may be allowed to continue or be worsened by the

teacher’s lack of management skill. Teachers’ repertoire of management skills, clear

insight and decisive follow-through are often a result of experience. Additionally, a

teacher’s choice of management style or the ability to be responsive to particular

situations may be determined through experience as well (Warga, 1996). Therefore, a

teacher’s inexperience may contribute to a lack of realistic understanding about

expectations of student behavior. Methods for coping and reducing the ill effects of

behavior problems on teachers may be explored as well. Difficulty with behavior

problems was cited as one of several variables found to contribute to significant

differences in teachers’ initial expectations and the changes occurring after one year or

more on the job (Harris, 1998).

Corley (1998) states that discipline may not be an issue, when other conditions

within a teaching situation are met in a satisfactory manner. However, if a mentoring

relationship between new and experienced teachers, accurate classroom insight, and

understanding of community expectations does not exist, having good discipline is



critical (Corley, 1998). This finding seems to suggest the importance of an alignment

between teacher and community goals, and a supportive collegial relationship.

Finally, in a study involving both teacher educators and beginning teachers about

what beginning teachers should know, management and discipline were found to be

needed the most. Even though there was disagreement over where teacher training should

occur on the job or at the university, both agreed that discipline and behavior

management were necessary teacher competencies (Byrd-Rider, 1998).

The effect of problems brought on by feelings of isolation and lack of support,

changing demographics, as well as, behavior and discipline problems might well pose

concerns for teachers. The problems might well affect teachers through low teacher

morale, teacher absenteeism, high teacher turnover and attrition. The discussion that

follows describes the latter areas.

Possible Effects on Teachers

Low Teacher Morale

The presence or feelings of stress may reflect the morale of the teacher as it

relates to student behavior and supportive or non-supportive collegial and administrative

relationships. Tishler and Emest (1987) in their study of 48 Alabama school teachers on

stress, identified the highest job stressors to include disruptive students, and relationships

with supervisors among others.

Studies that probe/investigate teachers’ perceptions of the leaders’ support and

teachers’ resulting responses, may provide clues about teachers’ morale. Hoy and Brown

(1988) focused on administrative and teacher relationships in their study. Their findings

8

R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.


revealed pereeptions of the leadership ineluding both strueture and eonsideration. The

findings were based on perceptions of the leadership providing encouragement and

leaders receiving cooperation from teaehers. Consideration and encouragement may

support and acknowledge the teacher by administrators simply being present or having

open communication when teaehers have problems. Kouzes and Posner (1995) define

Modeling the Way as leaders providing maps to guide people. They allow their actions to

provide a foundation upon which to build a credible relationship.

There is an awareness of a need to provide support to teachers. Mantle-Bromley,

Gould and MeWhorten (2000) reveal their attempt of providing emotional support in the

form of encouragement for successes, attending to teaehers when lack of eonfidenee or

blockages of alternative strategies ensue, and when tears and sadness persist. Weiss and

Weiss (1999) point to the need for new teaehers to be a part of induction programs.

However, while these programs exist, they vary from district to district in

conceptualization and strueture. These programs might offset current realities of minimal

professional development opportunities and lack of support from colleagues.

Teacher morale may be linked to the type of training provided when it includes

teaming, mentoring and supervision. Mantle-Bromley, et al. (2000) note that in their

study describing three program structures for preserviee and recently graduated students,

teachers consistently gave the non-traditional program higher ratings of satisfaction on a

post hoe comparison. The non-traditional programs referred to as Project Promise and

Professional Development Schools included supervision by full time university faculty

and a teacher scholar, teaming, discussions, mentoring, peer observations, and school

wide activity participation. The broad parameter of experiences for teaehers provided by


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CLFLTURE

the non-traditional program may reflect support in terms of practical support strategies

and companion support.

Some relationships between novice and mentor teachers emphasize collaboration.

A paradigm change toward reciprocity of teaching and learning roles for novice and

mentor teachers. Some research reveals the concept of teachers feeling less isolated and

more supported if their ideas are valued (David, 2000). High morale, the intention to

remain in teaching and a stronger commitment to teaching was found in school cultures

with participative decision making and ones ordaining and supporting collaboration

(Weiss, 1999).

Communication in relationships may be an important link to achieving high

morale. The teacher-administrator relationships that involve support, encouragement,

clear communication and guidance in management are evaluated as well-done by their

teachers in their job performance (Weiss, 1999). In addition, this study reveals that a

school culture that allows a collaborative environment and is supported by the leadership

is related to the first year’s teacher morale, and wanting to stay in the profession (Weiss,

1999).

Teacher Absenteeism

Teacher Absenteeism in the field of education has been scrutinized in several

previous studies (Bridges, 1980; Bridges and Hallinan, 1978; Jacobson, 1989; Foldesy &

Foster, 1989). Teacher absenteeism is found to be more prevalent as compared to other

professions (Pitkoff, 1981). According to Lewis (1982), within the United States on any

individual day, it is not unusual for 200,000 school employees to be absent from work. A

10



study covering three sehool distriets in Washington state on teacher absenteeism and

perceptions of the professional environment found that public school elementary teachers

were absent more often than support personnel or other secondary teachers. In a study of

teacher absenteeism of two hundred seventy urban elementary schools in Texas, one of

the variables found to influence teacher absenteeism was years of experienee (Davis,

1997). Teacher’s absentee rate inereased with years of experience. The study also foxmd

that leadership behavior influenced teacher absenteeism.

Scott and Wimbush (1991) in their study of 265 teachers concur that teacher

absenteeism is a serious problem in the school system. Additional studies have occurred

about factors affecting school attendance ineluding job satisfaction (Cheloha & Farr,

1980; Clegg, 1983; Haekett, 1989; Seott & Taylor, 1985).

The relationship between teachers and administration was found to have an

impact on teacher satisfaction (Chapman, 1982; Chapman & Lowther, 1982). The

findings in some studies on absenteeism seemed to imply that the more satisfied

employees had fewer absences on their jobs (Martin & Miller; 1986; Scott & Taylor,

1985).

High Teacher Turn-over and Attrition

In addition to absenteeism high turnover rate and attrition are prevalent among

teachers. In this section, attrition and teacher turnover will be discussed for first year

teachers and for teachers at various stages of their careers as well. Although the overall

attrition rate follows a u-shaped curve based on age, time in teaching and the life-cylcle,

other factors are also relevant. One of those factors involve participative decision-making

11



opportunities being supported by the administration (Bobbitt, et al., 1991). Other factors

include the opportunity to influence teaching, and school policy decisions, as well as

empowerment. Marlow, et al. (1997) disclose that new teachers decisions to leave

teaching may result from teachers feeling unsupported by the community, feelings of

disillusion and pressure to make things better without having a feasible way to do it.

Information will be provided that shows how teachers’ may/can become resilient

in working around stressors that could normally result in attrition. Beyond isolation and

lack of support/consideration, a further more comprehensive view of attrition reveals

other teacher motives that lead to high turnover and attrition. According to Chapman

(1982) attrition comes in many forms including those being certified and never entering

the field, those leaving within the first five years, and those who taught continuously.

Additionally, transient or intermittent teachers who often leave to raise families and

retum were also included. Chapman and Green (1986) suggests that in addition to

considering current relationships between administrators and teachers which enhance,

promote or allow job satisfaction, attention must be given to individual’s initial work

eommitment and early work experiences. According to the authors, this more

comprehensive look at attrition will assist in the understanding of a broader range of

relevant factors impacting retention. However, there is much research that focuses its

attention to the teacher and administrator relationship features that shape some of the

unfavorable conditions of teaching given the long term impact of the developing career

(Chapman & Green, 1986).

Teacher attrition patterns may be linked to career choiee decisions, lifestyle

issues, as well as work conditions. Heyns (1988) concurs with much of the literature

12



regarding teacher attrition being an issue worth further study in education. Based on this

author, teacher turnover may be higher than revealed levels have suggested. However,

the results of the study indicate that the benefits, salaries and level of satisfaction that

exist is reflected by the desire of former teachers to retum to teaching. The patterns of re

entry into the field also substantiate these findings. Findings also suggest that

late-entry teachers (entering after families), and those who worked intermittently and

those hired after 1980 were more likely to be products of fairly advantaged families.

These economically able teachers reported more satisfaction with the profession co

existing with their pattem of late entry and intermittent teaching. Implications for

reversing trends of attrition may be found in seeking ways to establish resiliency and

revitalization through paid sabbatical leaves, or other sources free from the routine

stressors of current work situations (Heyns, 1988).

Situations like the following may help to perpetuate behavior and discipline

concerns based on specific conditions within particular settings. Additional implications

may stem from iimer city schools where fairly high numbers of minority students exist

with underfunded and understaffed conditions. Further analysis of what can be done to

provide means of satisfaction within the context of these situations may be pursued with

the intent to reverse mobility and attrition in these areas (Heyns, 1988).

Chapman (1982) pointed to the initial commitment to teaehing as a strong

predictor of teacher retention when considering the first teaching experience, edueational

program adequacy and academic standing. Further analyzing of those who taught briefly

and left versus those who never taught revealed interesting findings as well. However, it

would seem that alleviating isolation and lack of support at the onset of teacher’s careers

13



might impact those teachers whose initial commitment was less than substantial to stay

rather than leave. It was speculated that those who never taught used the training period

as an opportunity to utilize time toward making decisions about other career goals. This

was foxmd to be in contrast to those who soon left teaching, changed jobs and reported

low satisfaction in their job and educational training (Chapman, 1982).

Regardless of an individual’s intent or motive, some may be more or less suited to

the rigors of education. Skill and ability level was investigated as it related to attrition in

teaching (Chapman & Hutcheson, 1982). In self-analyses, it was revealed that teachers

who left teaching rated themselves differently than those who remained, possibly

explaining some of the reasons why particular teachers stayed. Those remaining

characterized themselves as having organizational skills associated to time management,

new approaches and planning. Those who left were characterized as having evaluative

and analytical skills. Chapman and Hutcheson (1982) also point to the fact that many

who left teaching remained in the field in other capacities. Others who left education

entered into a wide variety of other occupations. For those teachers who remained

possessing organizational skills in management and planning, a setting free from isolation

and lack of support from colleagues and administrators would have benefited the teachers

who decided to stay as well as the existing teachers.

It is clear that teacher attrition may also revolve around a number of lifestyle

choices, involving intent, motive, and skill, among other issues not withstanding

isolation, the absence of supportive relationships, changing demographics, behavior and

discipline problems. Bobbitt, Faupel and Bums (1978) state that opportunities to

influence and participate in decision-making combat feelings of isolation and non-support

14


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLFLTURE

clearly exist. Marlow, et al. (1997) research indicates that new teachers leave the

profession because of disillusion and pressure. Conversely, it would seem that assisting

and supporting new teachers through idea sharing and collaboration might decrease

disillusionment and relieve pressure based on lack of skill, possibly increasing longevity

in the profession.

In summary, whereas these problems have existed in education in the past and

continue to exist throughout our present day, individuals (from presidents to ordinary

men and women) may often be found seeking to find solutions. This author as part of the

doctoral dissertation process officially joins their ranks. The problems including changing

demographics, teacher isolation and lack of support, behavior and discipline problems

possibly resulting in low teacher morale, teacher absenteeism, high turnover and attrition

remain a concern for many. Much has been written about Transformational Leadership in

the author’s attempt to find a solution within this study. Teachers find themselves in the

unique position to share their perceptions of leadership styles and their schools’

organizational cultures. In addition, as part of this study, teachers will provide

perceptions about how leadership style and culture are related and how they impact them

in their roles as teachers. Information will also be provided relative to school population

size.

Purpose of the Study

Education is important to everyone from presidents to the general public. The

success of schools directly affect students, teachers, and administrators and may

indirectly affect the strength, grovvTh and future well - being of a nation. Many problems

15



exist in education today. Some are longstanding problems, other problems represent

changing concerns contributing to current conditions within schools.

Learning about the culture of schools is important toward imderstanding what

goes on in the schools. The brief exploration, at the beginning of this chapter, on the

historical and political context of education within the United States and the general

social milieu of education today, created the researcher’s desire for a more intimate

examination of the literature. The purpose of this study was to gain an understanding of

the teachers’ perspective of their administrators’ leadership style, the schools’ culture and

the relationship between certain aspects of transformational leadership with particular

aspects of organizational culture.

Transformational leadership and culture form the comerstone of the study.

Transformational leadership may very well be the answer to some of the problems and

their effects including teacher isolation, student behavior and discipline problems,

changing demographics, low teacher morale, teacher absenteeism and attrition. However,

fundamentally this study will answer questions about the relationship between

transformational leadership and organizational culture in a steady and consistent

progression from the general to more specific intricacies.

For the purpose of this study, it is necessary to define basic and recurring terms

beginning with organizational culture, and transformational leadership.

By Organizational Culture is meant the norms that inform people of what are not the

dominant values that the organization cherishes above others, the basic assumptions and

beliefs that are shared by members of the organization, the “rules” of the game that must

be observed if one is to get along and be accepted as a member, the philosophy that

16



guides the organization in dealing with its employees and its elients. These elements of

organizational culture are developed over a period of time by the people in the

organization working together. They evolve during the history of the organization and are

shared and subscribed to by those who are a part of that history (Owens, 1991).

Pulitzer prize-winning novelist James Mac Gregor Bums (1978) describes

transforming leadership as “Such leadership [transformational] occurs when one or more

persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to

higher levels of motivation and morality” (p. 20).

Within the context of this study, the researcher views five eritieal components in

the transformational relationship between teachers and their leaders to include

“challenging the process” or current ways of thinking, working together to develop ideas

and “inspire a shared vision” while being coneemed for the feelings of all individuals,

and ’’encouraging the heart.” There will also be discussions on allowing or “enabling

others to act” and “modeling the way” for those who need guidance (Kouzes and Posner,

1995). Although these phrases have not been labeled as transformational, they have

qualities that closely resemble transformational leadership. In direct contrast bureaucratic

or hierarchial leadership approach is based on a well-defined rank or hierarchy of

authority, including rules to cover rights and responsibilities of employees with a system

for workplace procedures. Vertical communication is emphasized with close supervision

of those in lower ranks. Relationships were impersonal and promotions dealt with

competence in technical areas (Owens, 1991)

Organizational culture and climate are words that compliment each other. Culture

is sometimes described based on the way things are handled and how issues are resolved.

17



Climate is essentially the perception of the culture (Owens, 1991). In this study the

teachers’ responses to questions will be utilized to provide the data about what is

happening (climate) within the schools. Therefore, one of the instruments used in the

study will be referred to as a climate tool, but it was used to assess the school culture.

This informational study may be distinguished from others in additional ways.

Many studies involving schools and their leaders compare leaders’ self- assessments to

teacher perceptions of their leaders. This study only concemed itself with the teacher’s

perception of the leadership and the teacher’s perception of the organizational culture.

Therefore, this study is somewhat unique because it solely enlists the perceptions of the

teacher on school culture and school leadership. In addition, it is unique because

correlations were made based on individual teachers being used to represent the entire

school. Typically, the entire staff is sought to represent the school as a unit of comparison

to other schools. These unique features within one study distinguish it from others foimd

in the research of literature reviewed.

The practical outcome was the dissertation itself, which provided insight to

leaders about leadership style behaviors in relation to organizational culture. Also the

study provided resulting information based on intervening variables of student population

size. In a siraimary statement of an extensive review of research on school climate,

Anderson (1982) noted a need for more research that was conceptually based instead of

adding to a list of variables to discern or reaffirm a relationship. This study although not

purely conceptually based, added to the existing body of knowledge that result from

empirical findings about these relationships.

18



In conclusion, the framework for this study including research questions and

conceptual and operational hypotheses will follow with chapter summaries that provide

an overview of the entire dissertation.

Research Questions

1) What are teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ leadership (descriptive for the

composite as well as the subscales)? Are there any differences among elementary

teachers who work in schools of different sizes (F-test for three levels for the composite

as well as the subscales)?

2) What are teacher’s perceptions of their schools’ culture (descriptive for the composite

as well as the subscales)? Are there any differences among the elementary teachers who

work in schools of different sizes (F-test for three levels for the composite as well as the

subscales)?

3) Are there any relationships between principals’ leadership and schools’ culture

(canonical correlation)?

Conceptual Hvpotheses

1) There is a relationship between the implementation of the Transformational

Leadership Style and the Organizational Culture of a school reflected through the

teachers’ perception. Differences will be present based on school size.

2) There is a relationship between aspects of Transformational Leadership including

Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, Encouraging the Heart, Enabling

Others to Act, and Modeling the Way with aspects of Organizational Culture including

19



Satisfaction, Recognition and Power, Accomplishment and Commitment, as well as

AfSiiation and Strength of Climate. Differences will be present based on school size.

Operationalized Hvpotheses

1) There is a positive relationship between Transformational Leadership and

Organizational Culture such that characteristics of Transformational Leadership will be

reflected in aspects of the Organizational Culture.

2) Teacher’s perceptions will reflect a positive relationship between Transformational

Leadership and Organizational Culture such that ^pects of Organizational Culture will

be perceived as present and co-existing with characteristics Transformational Leadership.

Null Hvpothesis

There is no relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational

Culture such that characteristics of Transformational Leadership will be reflected in

aspects of Organizational Culture. There will be no relationship present based on school

size.

Overview of the Dissertation

The following descriptions summarize the contents of chapter one and provide a

brief description of what will be covered in the remaining chapters of the project.

Chapter I - Introduction will acquaint the reader with the problem and background

information that support it, the purpose and specific questions to be addressed.



Chapter II - Literature review will provide pertinent background information surrounding

the topic of transformational leadership, organizational culture and related information.

Chapter 111 - Methodology will outline the method used to obtain data and the procedure

used to disseminate and retrieve information along with schedules and approvals.

Chapter IV - Data Analysis will clearly restate the hypothesis and questions to be

answered, identify the test statistic for each and the step by step process of its use.

Chapter V - Findings/ Implications will be based on the results of the test statistic

including a discussion of the results and the implications for future studies.

Visual Conceptual Overview

Below two visual representations are graphically presented to illustrate the major

concepts within the study (Figures 1 and 2). The first graphic shows the primary

relationship being studied in this dissertation with school size as an intervening variable

to be considered (Figure 1). The main variables of leadership and culture are shown in

large bold lettering to denote the broadness of each main category or variable. The large

arrows between the two main variables demonstrate the relationship between the two.

The small letters on the side of the main variables represent the intervening variable of

school size to be considered in this study. Each of the three questions form the framework

for the study and are clearly indicated on the visual. The first question begins with a

focus on the broad/composite of leadership and progresses to a more specific or fmite

subscale focus. Specific differences being sought to answer the questions are also

identified. Question number two is structured in a similar manner as it examines the

second variable of culture. The final question addresses any differences or similarities

21



between all of the subseales from eaeh of the main variables of leadership and culture.

Each of the three questions lists the appropriate test statistic that will be used to identify

its value.

The second visual conceptualization of the study is presented in a graphic

format (Figure 2). Its language is more precise than the first visual by identifying the

specific type of leadership as transformational and identifying the specific type of culture

as organizational. It also delineates each of the five subscales within the leadership

variable, followed by a list of the seven culture subseales directly across from eaeh other.

The larger overarching concepts at the upper portion of the graphic are appropriately

represented with larger lettering. The concept is presented from the general concept and

progress to the more specific. The visual also identifies the anchor of the study residing in

the state of Michigan. The intervening variable of school size is listed in the oval at the

bottom of the visual.

22


TRANSFORM ATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

SCHOOLSIZE

A)

1/

\

QUESTION # 1

W hat Is teach e r 's perception o f their principals' leadership (descriptive for th e com posite a s well a s th e subscales)? Are th e re any differences am ong th e elem en tary teach e rs w ho work in schools of d ifferen t sizes (F- te s t for th ree levels for th e com posite a s well a s th e subscale)?

A ' -

/

QUESTION # 3

Are th ere any relationships betw een principals' leadership and schools' culture (canonical correlation)?

SCHOOL ' SIZE

QUESTION # 2

W hat is teach er 's perception o f their school's culture (descriptive for th e com posite a s well a s th e subscales)? Are th e re any differences am ong th e elem entary teac h ers w ho work in schools of d ifferent sizes (F- te s t for th ree levels for th e com posite a s well a s th e subscale)?

Figure 1. Visual Overview Conceptualization

23


TRANSFORM ATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

wdATioNAL mmm

Inspiring Shared Vision Enabling Others to Act

Modeling the Way Encouraging the M

Satisfaction \ CommKment

Strmgth of Climate AccompVshment

Reco^iition Power

Affiliation

state of Michigan Southeast Quadrant Michigan

School Size

Figure 2. Major Variables and Their Subscales

24



CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Overview

The literature review will be divided into five areas. The first part of the review

will share studies that discuss various qualities of principals as leaders. This discussion

may include defining qualities of being a principal. Studies that show the relationship

between leadership style and organizational culture will be covered in the second part of

the review. Here, leadership style and its impact on organizational culture in schools will

be discussed. Information is provided about the relationship between transformational

leadership and organizational culture in the part three of the literature review.

Additionally, as a subset, the relationship between specific qualities of transformational

leadership and its impact on organizational culture in schools will be discussed. The

fourth and fifth part of the review will briefly discuss the relationship between the size of

an organization and perceptions of the leadership followed by a discussion on the

relationship between size of the organization and organizational culture.

Qualities of Principals as LeadersGoal Strategist

Many qualities were found in the literature concerning principals in various roles.

Attaining goals was one of the qualities that appeared numerous times in the literature.

According to some of these sources, establishing goals is important in the role of

principal leadership (Goldring & Patemaek, 1994; Kochan & Spencer, 1999; George

25


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CLHLTURE

2001; Bradshaw, 2000). Numerous ways of ensuring that goals were attained was

explored in the literature. One of the primary findings was centered on being a goal

strategist. This involved using a number of strategies to ensure that goals were achieved.

Managing time to ensure that efforts could be focused on goals was important (Kochan

«& Spencer, 1999; George, 2001). Therefore, with the understanding that the attainment of

goals are an important quality of leadership and the realization that skills other than goal

attainment skills must be in operation to allow these goals to flourish.

A goal oriented leader needs to provide clear goals. The leader must also be a

facilitator to ensure the clarity of goals (Kochan & Spencer, 1999; Goldring &

Pasternack, 1994). When ample time is given to focus on goals, it is as important that the

goals be clearly stated and understood. If this does not occur time is not being managed

effectively. If the leader effectively functions in the role as a goal clarifier, time will not

be wasted because of lack of understanding about what is meant by the stated goals.

Goldring & Pasternack (1994) described an important strategy of principals as a framer

of goals, which brings about clarity related to goals for improvement.

According to the literature, goal oriented principal leaders align strategies toward

goal implementation (Smith, 1994: George, 2001; Goldring & Pasternack, 1994).

Aligning more than one strategy to ensure the attainment of the goal oriented principal

was implemented through the use of data gathering (Smith, 1994; George, 2001;

Goldring & Pasternack, 1994). Utilizing data to focus on goals allowed the principal as a

leader to align a narrowly focused implementation of goals based on the data. It allowed

the leader to be more strategic and precise. It further aided clarity because of its

specificity based on the data. According to Goldring and Pasternack (1994) consistency

26



in the use of specific or targeted goals could be aided by the use of data as a means to get

to effectiveness.

Some of the literature focused on the goal oriented principal leaders’ ability to

redefine or relinquish parts of the traditional role of leadership (Bradshaw, 2000).

Bradshaw (2000), George (2001), Goldring and Pasternack (1994), Kirby and Colbert

(1994), and Kochan and Spencer (1999) all reveal that in the quest to be a goal-focused

leader alternative roles may be utilized. The principal may function as coordinator or

guider, and be one who champions teamwork while having the ability to change roles and

redefine leadership. The principal may also function as a developer for teacher/staff

growth. Additionally, studies found that principal-leader goals could be reached through

roles as an empowerer which offered others greater opportunity for decision-making

(Kirby & Colbert, 1994).

Multi-Dimensional and Multi-Strategic Qualities

Another quality of principal leadership found throughout the literature was the

ability to be multi-dimensional and multi-strategic. Much of the literature speaks to the

complexity involved in the role of principal (Bradshaw, 2000; Sebring & Bryk, 2000;

Barker, 2001; Cascadden, 1998). Many principal-leaders have to serve in more than one

role at the same time. Principals often contend with the idea of being a manager, or a

leader (Cascadden, 1998). Issues surrounding whether to be more concemed with the job

that must be accomplished or the person/teacher who is performing the job are often a

V concem that makes principals acutely aware of the multiple dimensions and roles through

which they must function (Sebring & Bryk, 2000).

27



Leadership that is inclusive takes on the dimension of consideration of other

persons (Sebring & Bryk, 2000). The dimension of consideration emphasizes

relationships. Within those relationships the prineipal-leadership is focused on building

trust among those in the relationship and building a spirit of cooperation (Sebring &

Bryk, 2000). This dimension may bring about the need for different or additional

strategies that were not previously needed. Strategies that include engaging, supporting,

promoting, strengthening, selecting, building, defining and redefining are all possibilities

for use in building relationships (George, 2001). While some of the strategies may not be

new to leaders some might be new based on changing roles that call for the multi

dimensional approaches. Bradshaw (2000) describes the leaders’ ability to redefine his or

her leadership and consider others’ point of view as no longer an act of charity, but a

factor in the development of true partnerships.

A multi-dimensional principal-leader takes into consideration various points of

view fi'om different factions/groups. Sometimes these groups involve students and

various other school personnel (George, 2001). Prineipal-leaders struggle with whether or

not to focus on the collective vision or their own personal vision (Bradshaw, 2000).

When the multi-dimensional leader gives consideration to others and their point of view,

the leader may use many different strategies to achieve the same purpose. Goldring and

Pasternack (1994) discuss how numerous strategies can be used to eommunicate goals to

everyone in the organization.

Barker (2001) describe qualities of leadership as the ability to use a full range of

styles and strategies. According to Barker (2001) this approach is relevant because it

aligns itself to many people at the same time and is linked to effectiveness. Cascadden

28



(1998) describe numerous qualities of principal leadership including manager, leader, and

visionary qualities. In this way, the multistrategic and multi-dimensional leader could be

said to be both versatile and well-balanced in their approach. Leaders who demonstrate

qualities of consideration to others as a part of their leadership might also be democratic.

Cascadden (1998) also describes the need for democratic leader qualities that eonsider the

affect of the leadership on others.

Caring Leadership Qualities

Kirby and Colbert (1994) describe this quality of leadership as one that concerns

itself with an emphasis on human relations. There is a foeus on working for the common

good. The human relations emphasis and caring qualities are embraced as the foundation

or the conditions for success. The human relations aspect and the aspiration for success

are intertwined in a manner that allows them to peacefully coexist. In the pursuit of

working to achieve success the principal leader is considerate of those who are working

toward the achievement of a goal. Sebring and Bryk (2000) describe the leader as one

who has qualities that are concemed with the well-being of others. There is a dual focus

that includes success and working peaceably.

The caring quality also is shown in the leader’s use of resources, tools and

provisions to get the job done (Sebring & Bryk, 2000). The leader quality of caring allow

leaders’ behaviors that reflect the value of considering others in a tangible way. In this

study the challenge involved improving test scores. There is a linkage between what is

valued and an associated behavior. The concem for the well-being of others can be seen

29



and felt. Sebring and Bryk (2000) also describe this leader as one who builds trust and a

spirit of cooperation.

The caring quality must be seen as non-manipulative. Kirby and Colbert (1994)

describe authentic and genuine qualities that focus on others as able to influence the

climate of the school. According to Sebring and Bryk (2000) the impact of the principals

caring qualities allow others in the environment to take risks and to take on other

challenges. Within the context of events in the school it is easy to speculate about

potential impact. This study focused on the challenge involved in improving test scores.

In a comparative study between school and business leaders there was agreement

on four of the top five ideal attributes for leaders (Sebring & Bryk, 2000). Although the

commonality on four of five attributes was surprising, more surprisingly was the attribute

of caring which distinguished the settings. The difference was found based on the

attribute of caring desired in the school setting as contrasted with the attribute of

intelligence among business leaders.

The Relationship Between Leadership Style and Organizational Culture

After examining the literature, the researcher found three different leadership

styles. Each one appeared to have a different impact on the culture. The first leadership

style was one that allowed the opportunity for exploration of ideas among teachers within

the culture and was built on trust. The leadership was not restrictive, judgmental or

punitive toward teachers. The second leadership style utilized a directive form of

leadership, a programmed approach with restrictions within the culture in contrast to the

30



first. The third style of leadership was responsive and interpersonal, it promoted

understanding and satisfaction among people within the culture.

Leadership Built on Trust with Freedom to Explore Ideas without Reprisals

The first leader’s style was one where principals were supportive and trusting

toward teachers. Leaders were supportive in their relationships with teachers, yet they

also encouraged rather than restricted relationships among teachers. They trusted teachers

to share new ideas. These leaders promoted collegiality among staff. They realized a

need to not only provide support in their relationship with teachers, but the need to

facilitate a network of supportive relationships within the culture. Tarter and others

(1995) described the need for principals to be supportive of collegial relationships. A

supportive principal to individual teachers alone without the support of other coworkers

could not produce a culture in which trust existed between colleagues. Tarter, et al.

(1995) described the culture as being comprised of relationships between teachers as well

as between principals and leaders. Johnson and Kardos (2002) described a leadership

that encoiuaged teamwork rather than separation between colleagues existed within the

culture of some schools.

When teamwork is encouraged, colleagues’ ideas may result based on the

association and the work produced by the team. Tarter, et al. (1995) describe the benefit

derived from the collegial /teamwork approach that produces a larger impact on the total

culture. Hoy and others (1992) describes an environment that allows teachers to try new

ideas and make mistakes without feeling at-risk. The environment/culture is one of

openness and professionalism with the teacher’s perception of trust among each other and

31



being effective in what they are doing. Tarter, et al. (1995) further identify the eollegial

approach allowed by the principal within the culture as impacting effectiveness.

The importance of teachers being part of a culture where trust allows attempts at

potentially effective new ideas is reflected in a study linked to a culture of

accomplishment. The emphasis on accomplishment produces an additional impact on the

culture. This study of leadership and school culture found that a leadership that takes a

moderate amount of risks, and encourages teachers to be risk takers while emphasizing

accomplishment and learning was a strong predictor of teacher commitment

(VanderStoep, et al., 1994). This model was tested with teachers of 1** through 6* grade

teachers in Arizona and 3* through 5* grade teachers in Florida.

The opportunity to explore ideas toward school improvement and a sense of

accomplishment was foimd to be present within the culture based on a study of school

improvement and leadership roles. There was a commitment to clarify expectations to

guarantee necessary conditions to gain success (Ainseow & Southworth, 1996). In this

project where teacher leaders were working with consultants to ensme success, there was

agreement about what they wanted to accomplish. However, they did it in different ways.

There was autonomy and freedom within the culture. This freedom to explore various

ways to accomplish school improvement was an example of culture that was not

restrictive, judgmental or punitive toward teachers.

Littledyke (1997) described an organization with a leadership/ management style

that allowed teachers the freedom to exercise some autonomy within their work.

Autonomy resulted in teachers feeling valued. It also produced the freedom and

flexibility to meet the needs of their students in yet another way. This flexibility also led

32



to innovation in approaches to meet students’ needs. Hoy, et al. (1992) and Tarter, et al.

(1995) further described environments that allow teachers to try new things and

potentially make mistakes without feeling at-risk. According to Hoy, et al. (1992) these

environments were also ones where communication was open with a free exchange of

ideas based on an aura of professionalism. These aspects of the culture were also linked

to teachers’ feelings of effectiveness and trust toward the leadership.

Hoy, et al. (1992) describes a culture where the leader’s style is supportive of

teachers in an indirect manner allowing educational goals and objectives to be met. This

type of leadership that is indirect, allowing teachers a feeling of freedom, develops a

culture of trust. The feelings of trust are linked to school effectiveness. Johnson and

Kardos (2002) describe cultures where principals are involved in the professional

development of their teachers, along with the existence of teacher leaders within the

culture. Kirby and Colbert (1994) discuss leaders who promote freedom through

empowerment. These staffs are allowed to reach their goals through empowerment. They

have greater status, opportunities to improve their knowledge skill and greater access to

decision making. Tarter, et al. (1995) describe a style of leadership that operates with an

understanding that the culture is comprised of relationships between teachers, as well as

between the teacher and the principal-leader.

Tarter, et al. (1995) described the need for a collegial leadership style if a larger

impact is to be felt on the total culture. This type of leadership appears to encourage

teamwork and value the opinions of many instead of solely the relationship between

principal and teacher. Johnson and Kardos (2002) describe principals who highlight the

33



benefit of diversity rather than what separates people. The principals in these cultures

find ways to work together for the total good of the environmental culture.

In summary, it would appear that a culture that is not restrictive or punitive and is

not judgemental of others’ ideas may influence the creation of norms that allow those

who comprise the culture to focus on the open exploration of ideas. Owens (1991)

describes a similar culture in which individuals are able to participate in decision-making.

Participants have an emotional and mental involvement in this participative or collegial

environment and take ownership for decisions. According to Kouzes and Posner (1993)

open communication is a necessary prelude to the development of trust.

Programmed Approach to Leadership vyith Restrictions

The second leadership approach utilized a programmed technique with more

restrictions for teachers. Littledyke (1997) described a directed style of management with

an accordingly highly-prescribed curriculum to teaching. These programmed and directed

management styles of leadership inhibit flexible approaches to leadership within the

culture. Owens (1991) describes the bureaucratic theory as hierarchial control with close

supervision of individuals in the lower ranks. The bureaucratic approach includes vertical

commimication with clear written rules for others to follow.

Leithwood, et al. (1990) described cultures where hierarchial approaches exist as

one that dllow resjtOnses to hierarchial crisis and does not allow for proactive decision

making. Leithwood, et al. (1990) emphasize a need to have more research to understand

the impact of leadership styles on culture.

34



The restricted and programmed approaches to leadership style closely resemble

heirarchial approach. Webb and Villiamy (1996) describe a heirarchial style of

management as one that creates a separation between leaders and their staffs. The impact

on culture varied greatly based on contextual factors that existed. However, their findings

suggest the need for a full range of styles. Leaders in these environments are fhistrated

and ambivalent because inspection fi’om upper management sometimes favors top-down

management.

Restrictive climates are sometimes maintained through the principal’s use of

symbols. Teachers screen and assess principals’ views as articulated through the

symbolic actions of the principals. Whether in public or parochial school environments,

the principals’ values are reinforced in numerous ways (Kelly & Bredeson, 1991). The

integration of the leader’s actions, thoughts and words influence others and spread

meaning throughout the culture. Leaders use rituals to remind those in the culture about

what to do. The leader’s pattemed use of words and symbols enforce certain behaviors

and circumvent efforts of subcultures.

Fullan (1992) describe a leadership style that is too narrowly focused as one to be

careful of. It is sometimes over-dependence on the personality of the leader. It may also

focus on a single solution as an answer to problems. Charismatic leadership is a style of

leadership that could restrict alternatives. This over-dependence could restrict other

choices, strategies or styles that might pose viable options to be implemented in the

organizational culture. Bass (1985) describes followers as having tremendous trust and

possibly idolizing and worshipping the leader in a charismatic leadership situation.

35



Charismatic leaders themselves are confident in themselves and view themselves as

having a destiny that is supematural.

Responsive Leadership that Is Interpersonal and Enhances Understanding and Satisfaction

The third leadership style was one that promoted understanding among people in

the organizational culture. This leadership style focuses on being responsive to diverse

groups of people. Leaders that select symbols that clearly represent practices

help others to understand deeper subjective meanings that lie beneath the surface

(Vaughn, 1995). Johnson and Kardos (2002) described principals that understand the

strength of diversity, understand what each group has to offer and utilizes each group’s

strength for the common good. Additionally, the leaders that promote understanding

encourage a culture where all work together and provide professional development for

all. Johnson and Kardos (2002) described principals who integrated novice and veteran

eultures within the same setting. Both groups of teachers had something to offer.

Integrative principals capitalized on what the groups offered to benefit the eulture of the

organization for the common good.

There are many ways for leaders to be responsive to teaehers within the culture.

Kelley (1999) noted the motivational impact on teachers receiving performance awards.

Information from the qualitative study based in North Carolina, Maryland, Colorado and

Kentucky indicate that teachers are motivated after receiving rewards. An inerease in the

focus of teacher effort and an increase in the teachers’ feeling of intrinsic reward were

noted as well. Another study that focused on the power of work related praise, revealed

36



teachers’ feelings of satisfaction, confidence, pride and belonging. These principals were

viewed as individuals who used praise as an effective tool in their roles as principals

(Blase & Kirby, 1992).

Interpersonal relationships focus on the relationship between individuals by

definition. However, a study where rural school-teachers were publicly rewarded, found

that in addition to teachers feeling gratified and motivated, increased teacher effort and

perceptions of their principals as effective resulted because of their use of praise (Norris,

1998).

Leader responsiveness in other settings was also linked to feelings of teacher

satisfaction within the culture. Studies not involving teachers but within the educational

setting reflect very interesting findings as well. Young’s (1982) study of custodians

within an educational setting discovered more about feelings related to leadership and

satisfaction. More than the actual work itself, the custodians perceptions of dissatisfaction

were connected to their boss’s level of consideration for them as individuals. Individual’s

feelings regarding their humanity and perceptions of the leadership are factors to be

considered when thinking about satisfaction.

Individual’s perceptions of their work situations are similar to a barometer that

indicates/measures an individual’s level of satisfaction. Primary relationships within the

work setting would appear to have an impact on the individual’s perception of their work

situation also. The level of the leader’s responsiveness may also influence the

individual’s perception of satisfaction. Leaders who were considered to have

transforming qualities focused more attention on subordinates/teachers as individuals

(Waldman, et al., 1987).

37



In a study to determine the relationship between leadership and performance

outcomes, those leaders with transforming qualities were found to focus more attention

on subordinates as individuals (Waldman, et al., 1987). Performance ratings and

transforming qualities of individualized consideration were found to have significant

correlations (Waldman, et al., 1987). Subordinates’ perceptions are influenced in part by

the leader’s focus on the concern of individuals. Of all the correlations in the study, those

between employee satisfaction with current performance and leadership practices were

found to be the strongest. In summary, there is a mental association between

transforming leadership involving responsiveness and concern for individuals to the

individual’s satisfaction as reflected on the appraised outcomes.

Employee perceptions seemingly have a correlation to particular leadership

qualities. Individual consideration as a leadership quality was found to be the best

predictor of employee ratings (Waldman, et al., 1987). In summary, employees’

perceptions of the leadership correlated to their own successful appraisal rating. When

leaders show consideration to individuals, their employees reflected feelings of

satisfaction about themselves. Leader responsiveness in the area of individualized

consideration correlated with multiple areas of satisfaction.

In a study investigating principal’s leader roles, strong leadership and the school’s

organizational culture was foimd to be associated with more satisfaction on the job

among other findings (Cheng, 1994). The principal’s leadership was positively related to

intrinsic and extrinsic satisfaction, and job meaning (Cheng, 1994). The study also found

that the stronger the leadership was perceived to be, the more effective the school

organization was perceived also. The schools organizational effectiveness as part of the

38



principal’s initiating structure was also positively aligned to the functioning of the

organization and the principal’s leadership culture.

In another study concerning a small school culture and student achievement, it

was found that teachers felt a greater sense of satisfaction as well as a cormectedness to

staff and students. The small school culture was comprised of less than 400 students. It

was also found to have expectations that were deeply embedded in positive memories of

events. By contrast, the culture of larger schools was more unforgiving, was focused on

differences between groups, and had less nostalgic memories (Wasley & Lear, 2001).

Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture

Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture will be discussed

centered around three concepts found in the literature. The coneepts are: Descriptions

and Implications Resulting from their Combination, Meeting the Needs of Others within

the Culture, The Strength of Transformational Leadership within the Organizational

Culture, Renewed Commitment through Transformational Reassessment in the Culture,

and Receptivity to Transformational Change in the Organizational Culture.

Descriptions of Each and Implications Resulting from Their Combination

Leadership and organizational culture co-exist within the organization. The use of

the transformational leadership style may influence the eulture through the addition of

new norms or the reshaping of existing cultural norms. Major implications from Dinham,

Caimey, Craifgie, and Wilson (1995) in their research of three secondary schools speak

to the complexity of separating leadership style and organizational climate. They found

39

Reproducecl with perm ission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without perm ission.

TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AN D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTTJRE

the task to be difficult. Owens (1991) describes culture as the dominant values that

inform members of acceptable and unacceptable behavior. It reflects basic values that are

highly respected and conformed to by the membership. The organization’s philosophy

helps to distinguish it from other cultures as well as provides a frame for guiding the

organization in dealing with its employees. The culture develops over time with its

resulting stories, norms and symbols. Schein (1992) describes the development of culture

as a process whereby members adopt a set of solutions to problems that have consistently

proven effective. Eventually basic assumptions about methods of handling problems,

relationships and activities become part of a subconscious process.

The root word in transformational is transform. To be transformed is to be

changed. Transformational leadership implies change or transformation in leadership.

Therefore, the relationship between transformational leadership and the organization are

connected in the change process. Bums (1978) described transformational leadership as

fostering a more long-lasting change because of its focus on end values. Techniques for

change involving decision-making will reflect the transformational leadership style

within the cxiltureJ Kirby, Paradise, and King (1992) found transformational leaders to be

analytical yet decisive, calculating for higher probabilities of success. They also

displayed analytical adeptness in their consideration of issues and in the team

membership selection process. In the study involving fifty-eight graduate students

covering fifteen school districts, they found such characteristics as being committed,

caring, supportive, and personal in their relationships. Kirby, et al. (1992) also described

leadership participation in collaborative strategies in goal setting and powerful language

skills reflecting precise mental pictures.

40



Flexibility was the overarching leader characteristic found in this study. The

flexible approach was revealed in opportunities for individual group members to assume

leader roles as they became capable. This flexibility characteristic impacted the culture

by providing opportunities to be transformed. Kirby and Paradise (1992), Bums (1978),

and Kouzes and Posner (1995) note the flexibility factor in suggesting that

transformational leaders ultimately become moral because it raises the level of human

conduct and ethical aspirations transforming both the leader and the follower. Similarly,

Bennis and Nanus (1985) describe transformational leaders as those interested in making

heroes rather than becoming heroes. Here, the flexibility factor in transformational

leadership allows for acknowledgement and empowerment to come to whoever it is

entitled.

The transformational culture, unlike a hierarchial or transactional culture, does not

focus on a top-down leader management approach. Sergiovanni (1980) described culture

in a transformed leadership context as a body of like-minded people bonded together

through their common conunitment. Gardner (1990) described leadership as a process

involving persuasion of followers. In transformational leadership, the leader’s ability to

gain commitment from followers is essential because of its non-coercive nature.

Therefore, it is important for leaders to possess skills in persuasion.

Transformational leadership culture in the literature was described as one where

there was bonding among members and between leaders and followers (Silins, 1994;

Bass, 1985; Bums, 1978; Sergiovanni, 1991; Tichy 8c Devaima, 1986). The leaders’

recognized the importance of meeting the moral, emotional and intellectual needs of the

followers. In a study where the stated goal was that of school improvement,

41



awareness about the importance of meeting the needs of people caused the organization

to also proclaim these areas as a necessity (Silins, 1994).

Meeting the Needs of Individuals within the Culture

As a result of focusing on the personal needs of people in the areas of their

emotion, intellect and morality, it created a bond between the leader and the followers.

The resulting bond that occurs as part of the transformational leadership process provides

a passageway to achieve school leadership goals. (Silins, 1994) in a study on school

improvement describe bonding that occurred which allowed for the school’s goals to be

more easily achieved. The leader’s consideration for the follower provided an opportunity

for program development and school improvement. The leader also utilized rewards for

positive performance as a means to show individualized consideration. The bonding

process created a type of responsiveness within the eulture between the teacher and the

principal that allowed for a more successfiil promotion of change.

The leaders’ qualities foimd in transformational leadership reflect consideration

for the needs and personal well-being of teachers. They enabled future needs to be met

while enhancing the moral development of all and ensuring school improvement. In a

study concerning school improvement, individualized consideration was shown to be the

most important eharacteristic influencing teacher programs and instruction within the

school culture (Silins, 1994). The individualized consideration relationship that is a part

of the transformational leadership style and is implemented by the leader is a process.

The process involves an on-going commitment to the leader’s and the follower’s

relationship along with a similar commitment to a transformed and improved school.

42



Transformational leadership involves the proeess of collaborative exchange of

ideas and eollaborative change in attempts to achieve improvements within schools

(Bass, 1985; Bums, 1978). This proeess meets emotional and intellectual needs of

teachers through individualized consideration (Silins, 1994). The eollaborative process

could provide an opportunity for bonding between leaders and teachers. Transformational

strategies used in an effort to make school improvements are part of the organization’s

culture where the strategies are being implemented. There is a positive response from

teachers and a more innovative environmental culture present. These leaders demonstrate

qualities of collaborative change and bonding between the teacher and principal (Bass,

1985; Bums, 1978; Sergiovanni, 1991; Tichy & Devanna, 1986).

The leaders’ need to feel tmsted by teachers who comprise the culture reveal the

value placed on a tmsting and needs being fulfilled within relationships within the

culture. According to Little (1982) and Brown (1993) communication can be used by

leaders to leam about others in their environment. Learning about individuals through

communication provides an opportunity to convey feelings, ideas, and individual needs.

What is leamed may provide the foundation for a holistic approach sometimes used by

transformational leaders. Here holistic refers to achieving goals while attempting to meet

the needs of individuals. Teachers’ responses to assist in the school improvement process

were substantial within the cultures where leaders interacted with teachers in a holistic

manner (Little, 1982; Brown, 1993).

Studies on transformational leadership that included bonding and collaboration

show that they impact the whole organization. The result is a positive response from

teachers and a cultural environment of innovation (Bass, 1985; Bums, 1978; Sergiovanni,

43



1991; Tichy & Devanna, 1986). In summary, those qualities of transformational

leadership that allow principals to invest in the needs and development of teachers impact

the whole organization as revealed by positive responses and an innovative cultural

environment.

In contrast, transactional leadership was shown to provide teachers with

opportunities to preserve and maintain the status quo. They focused on contingent reward

and management by exception. Therefore, although some teacher’ programs and student

outcomes were influenced by transactional leaders, transformational leaders were able to

effect significant change and attain success through the use of personal qualities along

with techniques including individualized consideration, stimulation of the intellect, and

rewards and inspiration not utilized by transactional leaders (Silins, 1994). This

researcher agrees with Silins’ (1994) call for additional studies to provide more coherent

results through the use of canonical correlations or other statistical analysis techniques

with regard to consideration qualities, success and change.

One of the primary focus points for Campo’s (1991) study on school cultures and

principals was transformational leadership. Here the role of the transformational leader

as an influence toward the development and use of collaborative techniques and strategies

was discussed. Collaboration was seen as an important vehicle of transformational

leadership within the organizational culture. Rosenholtz (1989b) repeatedly supported

the use of collaboration through the creation of structural changes. Here structural

changes include the basic set-up of procedures and organization within the setting.

Duttweiller (1986) clearly extols the necessity for a leader’s ability to have followers’

commitment to goals of the organization. Van Den Berg and Sleegers (1996)

44



note a close fit between leadership and resulting school cultures based on the inclusion of

qualities or recurring patterns of collaboration, collective vision, participation and

individual grovvTh. These qualities closely reflect some of those commonly associated

with transformational leadership characteristics. They also comprised elements that

defined the operation of the culture within the study. Gaining followers’ commitment to

goals, having collective visions and providing for individual growth all reflect a focus

toward meeting the needs of individuals within the culture.

In multiple research studies (Sergiovanni, 1980; Dufour, 1986); Duttweiler, 1986;

Rosenholtz, 1989a, b), it seems that particular strategies of transformational leadership,

including opportunities for sharing in collaborative decision-making, allow for greater

satisfaction within the environment/culture. Collaborative schools also play a part in

reducing stress and isolation among its members and may potentially provide a long-

lasting effect on the culture. Leithwood, Lawrence and Sharratt (1998) reflect aspects of

transformational leadership and conditions in a learning environment clearly based on the

teacher’s perception of being valued and the satisfaction that came from the humane

treatment including respect and professionalism for the individuals.

Communication provides opportunities for meeting individual’s needs through

exposure to new ideas as part of a collaborative team. It also provides opportunities to

voice dissenting opinions when necessary. Communication can facilitate learning,

provide encouragement to staff and potentially provide inspiration. Leithwood, et al.

(1998), in a synthesis of three research studies, revealed that the transformational

leadership of a principal was an important condition to encourage and foster a learning

organization. A five-year study for Educational Research and Development noted that

45



transformational leadership could impact members of the staff through subtle ways of

communication. Data gathering, listening and observing were highlighted as some

among many methods of communication (Guzman, 1997). McEvoy (1987) reflected on a

communication system that allowed staff to disagree with existing practices and policies

and recommend changes. As a result of principals engaging in short, non-threatening,

fragmented forms of communication, teachers became encouraged and inspired rather

than threatened and discouraged.

The Strength nof Transformational Leadership in the Organizational Culture

The principal’s transformational leadership presents a strong influence on what

goes on within the school’s organizational culture. Madsen and Hipp (1999) reveal from

their study that in parochial and public school settings principals are key people in the

transfonping of schools. Transformational leaders attempt to influence, but they also

acknowledge the skills and the expertise of teachers. These transformational cultures

have leaders who encourage team spirit and leaders who feel the need to be trusted by the

teachers who comprise that culture. Leithwood, et al. (1998) in a synthesis of three

research studies revealed that the transformational leadership of a principal was an

important condition to encourage and foster a learning organization.

A study based on the possible effects of transformational leadership on

organizational conditions and student engagement showed strong, direct and significant

effects between transformational leadership and organizational conditions (Leithwood &

Jantzi, 1999). Organizational conditions were based on the school’s understanding about

the purpose and direction of the school. Other conditions involved the extent to which

46



beliefs were held within the organizational culture, how eompelling their beliefs were and

whether Jthey were aligned to their personal beliefs and the collective efforts of the

members of the whole culture.

The importance of strong leadership was felt in a study that dealt with leadership

in decentralized settings (Madsen, 1997). Transformational leadership was found to be

critical iit attracting and retaining teachers within the organizational culture. In a site-

based management setting, the responsive nature of transformational leadership was a

strong influence within the culture. The responsiveness of transformational leadership

was fundamentally responsible for the establishment of the leadership at the site-based

setting (Madsen, 1997). The successful responsive leadership behaviors were integrated

into the overall organizational culture within the site-based area in which it occurred.

Transforrnational leadership that maintains as well as attracts teachers may be important

to the consistent strength of the organizational eulture.

The strength of transformational leaderships’ focus on sharing between

individuals can be observed in the organizational eulture of which it is a part. It provides

a foundation for planning, agreement and cooperation. The intensity of feeling or the

compelling nature of a task is a factor based on shared values and beliefs (Leithwood &

Jantzi, 1999). The extent to which beliefs are agreed upon or shared may also be linked to

the degree to which individuals will support the agreed upon task. The contribution that

transformational leadership makes on the eulture depends on the nature and the actual

content of the assumptions, beliefs, and values (Leithwood & Jantzi, 1999). Therefore,

the resulting eulture appears to be a result of the type of leadership and the norms that

47



comprise the organizational eulture. Conversely, the norms within the culture would

seemingly reject the leadership focus.

Another study mirrored a similar finding regarding the strength of leadership,

however it appeared to be achieved through a strong enforcement by the leader, rather

than reliance on other aspects of transformational leadership. Mitchell and Tucker (1992)

found that the transformational leader is believed to largely orchestrate the general

direction of educational goals through a process of redefining and restructuring. The

research also found that organizational outcomes and transformational leadership was

related to the leaders’ role and goal accomplishments. This study does not emphasize the

strength of sharing that is normally refleeted in the transformational leadership culture.

According to Bums (1978) transformational leadership is more powerful than

transactional leadership. Here, he directly addresses the strength of a transformed

leadership in comparison to other forms of leadership. Silins (1994) concurs with this

point in his assessment of the relationship between reaching outcomes and

transformational leadership as a more dynamie process than transactional leadership.

According to a well-known authority, there is a coimection between leadership and

resulting norms within the culture. Bums (1978) states that, “ Leadership over human-

beings is exercised when persons with certain motives and purposes mobilize, in

competition or conflict with others, institutional, political, psychological, and other

resources so as to arouse, engage, and satisfy the motives of the followers” (p. 18).

Additionally, the emphasis on strength based on satisfying others as well as encouraging

debate is addressed.

48



Renewed Commitment through Reassessment

Ii> a study on transformational leadership that focused on an opportunity through

restructuring, to clarify goals both implicitly and explicitly, it was found that

transfonpational leadership had a strong effect on the direction and purpose of the school

(Thomas & Fitzhugh-Walker, 1988). Through processes of goal clarification, members

were abfy to be responsive to changing goals, conditions and circumstances in the school

improvement process. The change that occurred with the school improvement process

brought about the need for renewed commitment. Madsen and Hipp (1999) found in their

study about the impact of leadership style in a transformed culture to include

transformational strategies of teacher involvement empowerment, and trust. The re

assessment of mission and vision, allowed for a redefining of both. The resulting

accomplishment of goals through changing structure and renewed commitment, were all

part of the process that made principals in parochial and private settings essential in

transforming school cultures.

The concept of transformational leadership implies change through its

transforrping nature. Change transforms. The change process has many names. It may be

referred to as restructuring, reassessment, professional development, school

improvernent, or revitalization among others. Bass (1985) says that change is based on

the individual’s recognition of a need for change. The transformational leader

understands the need and assists in the restructuring and realignment of the organization’s

culture based on changing views. Much of the literature on organizational culture is

centered on patterns, conditions, and receptivity as a part of the culture that links it to

transformational leadership. Scribner, Cockrell, Cockrell and Valentine (1999) found that

49



existing cultural norms sometimes impacted commitment to school improvement. The

leadership and existing norms within the culture impacted the extent to which change

based on school improvement or restructuring was embraced. Cultural norms also impact

whether the improvement project was viewed as one that involved the whole school

community.

Although existing cultural norms impact attempts at reassessment and renewed

commitment, the dimensions of transformational leadership must also be considered.

Pielstick (1998) found patterns in a meta-ethnographic analysis of transformational

leadership involving a web of activities centered on relationships. The relationship

centered pn dimensions sometimes found within a transformed culture. Some of the

leadership dimensions include shared vision, vision-conununicating, building

relationships, exhibiting character and guiding implementation. Findings revealed that

sorting out the leadership dimensions from the cultural norms for operation provide its

challenges. According to Schein (1992), the one and only important thing that leaders do

may very well be that of constructing the culture. Gardner (1990) reaffirms this important

aspect of the leadership task by defining it as inducing, influencing and persuading team

members toward the pursuanee of shared goals within the organizational context.

Sergiovanni (1980) describes the principal as the most influential person in the

development of the culture of the school. Oakley and Krug (1991) and Sergiovanni

(1991) build on the concept by noting that in the successfiil implementation of change,

prineipals must model qualities if the qualities are to be contained within the culture.

Sphool improvement or restructuring, as it is commonly referred to, occurs when

schools examine their ways of doing things. The examination of current structures

50



sometimes result in new or changed events and activities. Individuals’ perceptions are

often subject to reflection and re-examination. Scribner, et al. (1999) describe a process

included in a school improvement plan involving many strategies also found in

transfomjational leadership. These strategies include collaboration, critical reflection,

shared values, shared norms and personal mastery. When large-scale School

Improvement Projects are embraced, the existing culture is sometimes examined in the

light of newly found improvements. The challenge of the improvement itself sometimes

creates or builds on ways of sharing the burden of the task. In one such study designed to

xmderstand change within the organizational culture, professional communities were

formed. These communities were based on concepts of trust, belonging, shared identity

and mutual independence (Scribner, et al., 1999). These concepts formed the foundation

of what was valued by all the people within the culture at that particular time. The

potential impact of the change process was so revolutionary that as team members

created new strategies, a “culture crier” was employed to alert everyone to the new

change (Scribner, et al., 1999). This study brought about the realization to the participants

that whep a group embarks upon a journey toward improvement, the examination might

bring about change and usher in a newly transformed culture. Additionally, re

examination of critical underlying assumptions could bring about changes impacting all

future behaviors. Therefore, a new or changing culture emerges based in the form of

improvement guided by transformational leadership.

51



Receptivity to Transformational Leadership Change

L^thwood and Jantzi (1999) in a study of teachers’ perceptions of

transformational leaders identified school conditions within the culture as a significant

influenti?il factor of their perceptions. The term “conditions” was used to identify

circumstances that needed to be considered as part of teachers’ perceptions of the leader.

Conditions within the school and outside of the school accounted for those considered

alterable or unalterable. Individual teacher’s understanding of types of leadership may

result from a broad cultural context in which one has participated. These perceptions

however may be modified through association and observation of other leaders. To this

extent it may be said that the organizational cultures provided categories of leadership

types that may be compared or contrasted. Teachers’ perceptions are based in part on

stored knowledge comprised from organizational histories of which they have been

exposed.

Marks and Louis (1999) suggest that the transformational leadership characteristic

of empowerment within the organizational learning culture is associated with certain

underlying conditions. These conditions within the culture involve the ability of teachers

to actively participate and be influential in decision-making. Some of the specific

dimensions or characteristics associated with the condition/culture were attention to

structure, shared commitment/collaboration, knowledge and skills, attention to leadership

feedback and accoimtability. Findings from their study of twenty-four schools

comprising elementary, middle and high school levels found that overall teachers at the

elementary level were more empowered than at other levels. Within these schools, it was

52



found that the conditions that promoted continued processing of knowledge resulted in a

shared vision-(Marks and Louis, 1999).

Pawar and Eastman (1997) reveal contextual factors that affect the organizational

receptivity to transformational leadership. Those factors include adaptation, integration,

goal attainment and values, among others. An organization’s contextual atmosphere

reflects its receptiveness to the particular type of leadership being provided. Receptivity

is the extent to which the atmosphere or contextual environment is responsive to change.

Responsiveness must come on many fronts. It must come from followers’

responsiveness toward the leader’s vision, it must come from the leaders’ responsiveness

to his own vision, it must come from the critical majority of followers and it must come

in the leader’s attempts to align individuals’ interests with the collective interest of the

group. It might appear that transformational leadership skills alone satisfy the

requirement toward the focus of a moral choice while foregoing self-interest for the

collective vision of the whole organization. However, Hinings and Greenwood (1998)

specify that securing an organization’s transformation is likely determined by both the

context/cplture and the nature of the transformation process. As an example, what is the

nature of the change or transformation imder consideration.

Changes in the leadership of the organizational culture sometimes occur based on

the environment outside of the school’s culture. Dinham, et al., (1995) acknowledge, as

one of many major implications of their study on organizational school climate, the link

between the culture and external considerations. Here, they note that prineipals both

influence and are influenced by the culture and factors outside of the culture as well.

53



The organizational culture is partially based on the identity of the organization.

The organization’s identity is described by Gioia, Schultz and Corley (2000) as

something other than a permanent identity that remains steadfast and immovable over

time. Paradoxically, while maintaining continuity of critical features, it must be fluid in

its approach to a changing environment. The identity of an organization takes into

account extemal as well as intemal perceptions of the organization. External conditions

or circumstances may impact an organization through changing circumstances yet basic

values may be maintained. Therefore, the transformational leader’s role might involve

assisting in teacher’s the development of a school culture that is receptive to shift without

changing basic values.

Subsets of Transformational Leadership

Overview

Five subsets of transformational leadership within the broader concept of

transformational leadership will be addressed regarding their relationship to the

organizational eulture in schools. The discussion will include using Kouzes and Posner’s

(1995) five leadership practices/eharacteristics. They describe the characteristics that

allow leaders to get extraordinary things done as ... Challenging the Process, Inspiring a

Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Modeling the Way and Encouraging the Heart.

Even though Kouzes and Posner (1995) did not consider these qualities as

transformational, they are basically the same as transformational leadership. Therefore,

for the purpose of the dissertation, they will be considered transformational leadership

characteristics.

54



The first subset involves taking risks to make changes, experimentation with new

ideas, focusing on other ways of getting things done rather than relying on the status quo.

The second subset involves working as a team member to develop a clear understanding

of the goals, vision and mission for the sehool or institution. The emphasis is on a shared

view of the vision, direction and purpose for the school. The third subset involves

facilitating a process that allows others to take part in the transformation process. This

may include empowerment or the use of resources not previously accessible to others.

The fourth one involves the leader guiding others through the change process. Leaders

show a steadfastness of commonly held beliefs through their action and their voice.

Leaders focus on issues and remove eonfiision. They steadfastly hold onto beliefs and

principles. The fifth subset is encouragement. The leaders are concerned about the

feelings of those in the culture. They attend to their needs by motivating them. They

inspire them to continue the quest of transformation. They also encourage through the use

of recognition and praise (Kouzes & Posner, 1995).

Challenging the Process. Current ways of doing things or the status quo can be

challenged through innovation. In a study showing the relationship between the

interpersonal behavior of leaders with their teachers within the school environmental

culture, teacher’s perceptions of the school was met with a positive response (Cresswell

& Fisher, 1996). The study revealed teachers’ feeling empowered based on the challenge

made to existing practices through innovation. As a result teachers felt empowered within

their working environment.

55



In a study involving the role of various types of principals in a changing school

culture reforms were implemented. The norm of experimentation was one of eleven

norms found in the facilitative transformational principal compared to the promoter

principal (Schweiker-Marra, 1995). Experimentation allowed individuals to challenge

operating structures or the status quo. Experimentation was a norm within the

environment. Therefore, challenging the process is a form of experimentation. Although

both principals were able to influence teachers within the culture, facilitator principals

were pereeived by teachers as more influential than promoter principals and they

possessed more transformational norms including caring, appreciation, collegiality,

involvement in decision-making and others.

Inspiring a Shared Vision. Shared Vision based on Kouzes and Posner’s (1995)

definition describes vision as the ability to imagine what is ideal. It includes an

orientation toward the future and a pursuit for excellence. Leaders who inspire a shared

vision are clear and expressive communicators of their hopes and dreams. A study

involving principals in a Hong Kong report statistically anedyzed results that show

leadership behavior as being significantly related to principals’ vision in schools (Chui,

1996). The study on school-based management involved Vz of schools involved

implementing the management approach and 14 not implementing the school-based

approach (Chui, 1996). In an observational study involving primary schools in London,

England shared vision was listed as one aspect of the schools’ culture found in effective

inclusive schools (British Journal, 2001).

56



In a project known as Improving the Quality of Education for All, one of five

overlapping areas found to be of uppermost importance to teachers was called Framing

the Issues. It deals with mapping out possibilities and using communication as a vehicle

for this process (Ainscow & Southworth, 1996). Accordingly, this study found that

sharing among those in the culture may provide residual benefits. Ainscow and

Southworth (1996) reveal that a focused commitment to share data that is systematically

processed will continually enhance a clearer and clearer picture of what is going on in the

school.

Hipp’s (1996) findings suggest that inspiring a group purpose or sharing in the

purposeful vision was significantly related to teacher effectiveness within the school

culture. Similarly, Conley and Goldman (1994) reflect findings of leaders who are able to

achieve goals that are agreed upon by members of the organizational culture through

creating and managing meaning within the organizational context.

Enabling Others to Act. Through Enabling Others to Act, Kouzes and Posner

(1995) describe an atmosphere where leaders allow others to interact with one another

based on feelings of trust and dignity. They enable others to act based on the use of

partnerships with emphasis on cohesion, team building and collaborative goals.

Participants are made to feel like owners of what is agreed upon. Empowerment may be a

strategy that enables the actions of others. In a study on empowerment, teachers were part

of two groups. One group was called the Accelerated Schools Model emphasizing

collaboration. The other group called the Traditional School Organization used a top-

down, hierarchical approach. Findings in this study show that teacher’s perceptions of

57



empowerment in the decision-making process bore a strong relationship to the type of

govemance. Teachers in the Accelerated Model perceived more involvement in decision

making than those in the Traditional Model (Shindorf, et al., 1998). A case study that

focused on leaders’ behaviors found that leaders could lead without violating the

professionalism or rights of those with whom they work (Reitzug, 1994). By utilizing

non-bureaucratic methods, the study also found that principals were leading, and guiding

through empowerment.

In a study involving the empowerment of teachers and principal leadership, the

persuasive influence of the principal was noted (Rinehart, et al., 1998). The principal’s

leadership role re-invented itself during empowerment. The leader’s focus changed from

primarily being responsible for persuasion in the restructuring process to one of change

facilitator (Rinehart, et al., 1998).

With the transfer of power or empowerment, a shift from the traditional

boss/manager role to that of facilitator occurred. Teachers were given the opportunity to

develop skills and opinions while increasing the level of involvement. Teachers emerged

to the forefront to display competencies they had developed through various types of

communication (Reinhart, et al., 1998).

Weiss, Camboime and Wyeth (1992) discuss the importance of enabling through

the leader’s ability to relinquish part of the leadership role through the role of faeilitatdr

after explicit discussions on the mission and the vision of the school. This finding seems

to imply the need to be discriminating about knowing when to empower others. Results

showed that teacher’s perceptions of the leadership were positive toward the principal’s

transformational practices of empowerment in their work environments. A study by

58



Furtwengler and Hurst (1992) showed that developing an organizational culture was one

of three important factors in effective leadership. Findings suggest that new ways need to

be foimd to empower individuals through opportunities for professional and personal

growth.

Modeling the Wav. Kouzes and Posner (1995) clearly define it as being guided

through consistency of principles, values and philosphies demonstrated by the leadership.

These prineipals should be distinctive enough to make the leadership unique.

Bureaucratic obstacles should be dismantled and opportunities for small

accomplishments leading to larger accomplishments should be provided. A study

utilizing veteran teachers’ perspectives of ineffective leadership behaviors, addressed

clarity and consistency issues, along with bureaucratic methodology. In this study, the

leaders’ behaviors confused the thinking of teachers. The leaders were ineffective

because they did not consistently guide or direct teacher’s behaviors. Lack of

participatory decision-making, contradictory body language and micromanagement,

unclear expectations and muscle-flexing led teachers to identify these prineipals as

ineffective (Spaulding, 1997).

Encouraging the Heart. Kouzes and Posner (1995) describe Encouraging the

Heart as making a connection between performance and rewards displaying hope and a

positive endurance while actively celebrating victories for all. In their description of

leadership they describe Encouraging the Heart as leaders encouraging others to continue

their quest to reach a goal or complete a task. These leaders encourage others to have

59



hope and a positive outlook through various means that might include public praise,

awards, or notes. In a research study involving schools, five overlapping concerns were

found among teachers (Ainscow & Southworth, 1996). One is fittingly labeled Providing

Incentives. Here teachers described a clearer sense of direction as a result of receiving

recognition of achievements. Also having face-to-face contact was an incentive to meet

deadlines. These activities allowed for opportunities to celebrate, compare notes and even

enter into healthy competition (Ainscow, 1996).

In a study that contrasted facilitator/transformational principals to promoter

principals, facilitator principal’s scored higher on eleven out of thirteen norms including

appreciation, recognition, caring and humor (Schweiker-Marra, 1995). In the second

phase of the study significant differences were found in norms identified within the

culture. Two of the five norms found to be significantly different between facilitator and

promoter principals were caring, celebrating and humor (Schweiker-Marra, 1995).

The Relationship Between Size of the Group and the Organizational Perception of Leadership

Many large organizations are in need of leaders according to the literature. In a

study that discusses institutions, organizations and businesses of enormous size including

the U.S. Postal Service, Sun Microsystems, FT & A Division of Ernst and Young,

Sunoco and Sears, there are perceptions about the leadership. The perception is that there

is a dwindling pool of talent for leaders, as a result of reorganizing, slashing of jobs and

massive retirements. In some instances middle managers positions have been removed.

60



The perception is that these leaders are more important than once thought. Leaders are

perceived as very important (Grossman 1999).

The perception is that leaders are needed, not the dictatorial types, for the large

sized groups. The reason is that leaders in large institutions like those mentioned must be

able to motivate and develop employees while meeting the demands of daily pressures.

The perception is that leaders in these large groups must be able to avoid falling into the

crisis mode that can produce feelings of being overwhelmed. Leaders in these groups

must be able to balance these two demands simultaneously. Solving this problem is

considered a serious one. Replacing leaders is considered costly with a limited number of

people to choose from based on the shrinking talent pool. Based on the complexity of the

size of the organization and the demands that it brings, there is no one-size fits all

(Grossman, 1999).

Although some research is available on the size of organizations and perceptions

of the leadership, more is needed (Bromley, 2001). The findings of the study suggest that

the corporate identity is linked with and infused in the personal attributes of the leader.

The perception of the leadership in the early stages of development when the company is

functioning successfiilly is based on personal qualities of the leader like that of being a

charismatic leader type. However, according to the study, when successful corporations

are no longer successful, scapegoats are blamed for the failure rather than the leader.

The size of the organization has some effect on the perception of the leadership.

Large organizations are more complex. Organizations are sometimes divided into

constituent parts. The subsidiaries have distinct identities and reputations. Sometimes the

parts influence the whole or the whole influences the parts. However, at other times

61



reputations are complex based on intricate social networks involving communication and

influence. This can all be further complicated by the perception that there could be

minimal understanding of the parent organization (Bromley, 2001).

Another perception is that although understanding leadership types is probably

much easier than understanding the dynamics of a large company, the leaders personality

may be perpetuated based on the mass media’s perception or the particular interest group

sharing the information (Bromley, 2001).

The Relationship Between Size of the Group or Organization and Organizational Culture

Sony executive Ken Kutari found that the size of Sony organization influenced

the experiences he had at Sony. Ken had an idea that he wanted to develop, but the Sony

culture was not receptive to it. He began to collaborate with individuals at the company

that manufactured Nintendo. When it became common knowledge that he was working

with Nintendo he met with resistance at Sony, but his boss gave him an opportunity to be

heard. They discussed the potential of the proposed project. He felt he could improve

upon the Nintendo game to create a better product for Sony. Initially, he concealed the

development of his project because of negative perceptions from those in the culture. He

could not interest anyone at Sony to work with him on the project even after he had

permission from his boss to start (Hamel, 2000).

At the time he made the proposal to his peers at Sony, the perception of his ideas

and his leadership was rather condescending. They wanted no part of it. Ken thought of

starting his own company, but he did not. He realized that the large Sony enterprise had

62



something that was very valuable to him in the development of his project. They had

human resources, manufacturing capacity and capital. Therefore, he decided to stay and

convinced people at Sony to listen to his ideas. He created the Sony Play Station and

created millions for the company. He became head of his department and the perception

of others toward his leadership changed. However, he had the insight to utilize the

benefits from a large enterprise to find success (Hamel, 2000).

Louise Kitchen of Enron was involved in attempting to trade gas projects using an

on-line computer approach. The nature of the work she was considering being a part of

was more complex than most online trading. Through persistence Louise continued to

share what she felt she could accomplish. She networked with key people who had

expertise to get the trading started. There were many who disagreed with her. When the

on-line trading was up and running successfully the perception of Louise and her venture

as well as the perception of the project was positive. Skeptics appeared to feel that

because of the size of the organization there was too much money to lose. Their

perception was centered on the potentially negative possibilities (Hamel, 2000).

Another study involving Human Resources Management Firms in Taiwan based

on ownership, size and sector. The study found that smaller businesses were able to be

more flexible in their approaches and able to implement their programs with more

effective Human Resource Policies. The larger employee sizes were perceived to a

moderate degree as more formalized. The smaller sized Human Resource Firms were

perceived as more advantageous whether the companies were to be used for experts or for

inward investments (Zhu, et al., 2000).

63



In summary, initially this chapter discussed recurring leadership qualities found in

the literature. Immediately thereafter, a discussion about the relationship between

various styles of leadership and culture within organizations was presented. Crucial

information was subsequently provided from the research found in existing literature

about the type of leadership known as Transformational as well as information on

Organizational Culture. Additional findings were presented, based on researchers’ review

of the literature, to reveal the impact of Transformational Leadership within the culture of

an organization. Still more information about Transformational Leadership, was provided

by delineating specific characteristics essential to the reader’s understanding of

Transformational Leadership as it relates to the study. Lastly, there was a discussion that

addressed the size of organizations in relationship to leadership. There was also a

complimentary discussion about size of the group and the culture of the organization.

The following chapter will identify participants in the study and how information

was gathered. It will also discuss the tools used to gather information, as well as the

measurement of items and data analysis.

64



CHAPTER III

METHODOLOGY

This study utilized a survey design to inquire into the relationship between

transformational leadership and organizational culture of a sample of elementary school

teachers within the state of Michigan. The purpose of this chapter is to describe the

details of what took place to ensure the execution of this study as well as how these

details will take place. The methodology chapter will include the Selection of Subjects,

Instrumentation, Measurement of Items, Data Collection, Data Analysis and Hypotheses.

Subjects

Demographics of respondents in the study provide an interesting insight into those

individuals who participated in the study. Ninety-percent of the respondents were

females, 32% were less than 30 years old. Eighty-one percent were white and 41% had

more than twelve years experience as teachers within the state of Michigan.

Respondents were solicited from three different sources. The respondents in the

initial source were a purely random sample of all the schools in Michigan. The

respondents were attained through a statewide Professional Development Conference

where any Michigan teacher could attend. Advertisement to complete surveys and

participate in the raffle at the conference specifically called for elementary teachers who

taught in the state of Michigan. Teachers who were in attendance at the conference and

wished to complete both surveys and have an opportunity to enter a raffle were

encouraged to participate. The second source of respondents came from the Michigan

65



Education Association magazine, the MBA Voice. The circulation is available to

teachers throughout the state of Michigan. The third source of respondents came from

students at Westem Michigan University. Solicitations were made to elementary teachers

employed in the state of Michigan.

It is incumbent upon the researcher to know that critical characteristics pertinent

to the study be in place (Borg & Gall, 1989). In this study, the researcher attempts to get

as many survey participants as possible that have worked with the principal within the

same building for three years. Although not critical, survey responses from teachers who

have been teaching several years is also desirable. They provide responses based on an

acquired general understanding of culture and leadership. This researcher defines

“several years” as more than 12 years. However, this effort is contingent upon how

difficult it is to get teachers to participate. It is an important attempt because, it will aid in

the understanding of the organizational culture and the leadership about which they are

being surveyed. Longevity in both of these capacities will likely provide a more accurate

assessment of the culture and leadership characteristics. If it is not possible to get surveys

only from those teachers who have worked three or more years in the same building, the

researcher will provide a ratio and/or a percentage of those who have worked three or

more years.

Selection of subjects as it related to the intervening variable was random.

Potential participants were not selected based on the population size of their buildings.

For the correlation of intervening variable of size, elementary buildings with a population

of 500 or more will be classified as large, those with an enrollment of 250 to 499 will be

classified as average, a small school will have 249 or less students. There is no definitive

66



ruling on what comprises a large or small school through the Department of Education,

therefore these numbers were arbitrarily selected. The size differentiations allowed for

some schools to be categorized as large, average or small based on the numbers.

Instrumentation

This study will involve the use of two survey instruments: The Leadership

Practices Inventory and Instructional Climate Inventory for Organizational Culture. Each

participant will complete both surveys.

Leadership Practices Inventorv

Transformational Leadership was surveyed through the use of the Leadership

Practices Inventory. Transformational leadership and its potential relationship to the

organizational culture are the focus of the dissertation. Inherent in the researcher’s

conception of transformational leadership is the focus on questioning existing methods

and procedures within the workplace. Argyris and Schon (1996) referred to this as

openly communicating and publicly testing assumptions.

The Kouzes and Posner (1995) Leadership Practices Inventory particularly

captures this concept in the subscale of Challenge the Process. Additionally, the subscale

of Inspire a Shared Vision and Encourage the Heart support the notion that inherent

within exemplary or extraordinary leadership is the human perspective coupled with a

goal focus, testing, and finally, goal acquisition. As well. Modeling the Way and

Enabling Others to Act reveal the human connection of leaders working with others in a

leadership role.

67



The Transformational Leadership survey is eomprised of 30 items with five

subscales. For the purpose of this study, a composite score will be utilized initially,

followed by a more narrow focus of the five subscales all pertinent to the researcher’s

topic and correlated to seven organizational climate subscales.

The internal reliability for the Leadership Practices Inventory has proven to be

good based on its consistency over time. It has been consistent over a variety of settings

and based on multiple studies. Analysis of the validity of the Leadership Practices

Inventory based on constituents’ responses, eliminating self-report bias also reflected

validation. Regression analysis of leader effectiveness on all five leadership practices was

highly significant. Additionally, independent efforts indicate correlations with other

instruments increasing confidence in the belief that the Leadership Practices Inventory

measures what it purports to measure (Kouzes and Posner, 1995).

The internal consistency of the instrument determined through individual items

correlated to the total scores of the original participant base was found to have

satisfactory results. Validity has been indirectly tested through comparisons of judges’

rankings of departments (Kouzes and Posner, 1995).

The Instructional Climate Inventorv

The Instructional Climate Inventory was used for the culture variable in the study.

The name of the inventory can be somewhat misleading because Fart 1 of the inventory is

used to survey the culture variable. It pertains to the teachers’ perception of the culture, it

does not reflect upon areas of instruction. A comprehensive view of culture will be

represented through teacher responses/ perceptions on the scales measuring Satisfaction,

68



Strength of Climate, Accomplishment, Recognition, Affiliation, Commitment, and

Power.

In a summary statement regarding the stability of the instructional climate

measures of schools in the Instructional Climate Inventory, it was found that there was

sufficient stability found from the six climate scales gathered over eight months for over

24 students in five schools (Krug, 1993). Also information that resulted from the use of

the scales was stable enough over a period of time to be useful in planning and

monitoring different strategies for intervention (Krug, 1993).

Measurement

Leadership Practices Inventorv

The Leadership Practices Inventory (Observer) was used for the leadership

variable in this study. The inventory consists of a 30-item questiormaire with five

subscales based on a Likert scale of 1 to 10. The values of the scale described by authors

in the instructions for scoring is 1 meaning Almost Never, 2 meaning Rarely, 3 meaning

Seldom, 4 meaning Once in a While, 5 meaning Occasionally, 6 meaning Sometimes, 7

meaning Fairly Often, 8 meaning Usually, 9 meaning Very Frequent and 10 meaning

Almost Always. Each of the five subscales is reflected by 6 of the 30 questions.

Questions #1,6, 11, 16, 21,and 26 are based on Challenging the Process. Questions #2, 7,

12, 17, 22, and 27 are reflective of Inspiring a Shared Vision. Questions #3, 8, 13,18, 23,

and 28 are about Enabling Others to Act. Questions #4,9,14,19,24, and 29 address

Modeling the Way. Finally, questions #5,10,15,20,25, and 30 provide information on

Encouraging the Heart. The leadership subseales reflected on the survey consist of (1)

69



Challenge the Process, (2) Inspire a Shared Vision, (3) Enable Others to Act, (4)

Encourage the Heart, and (5) Model the Way. For the purpose of this study, scores will

be taken on all five subscales to reveal teacher perceptions on each of the scales.

A composite score was achieved by obtaining a total score and dividing the total

by the number of items. The subscale scores were calculated by adding the total of items

on the subscale and dividing by the total number of items. Demographic questions are

found in questions #109-115 including one on school size and teacher tenure within the

current building.

The Instructional Climate Inventorv

The Instructional Climate Inventory Form T has two parts. Only one part of the

inventory was administered. Part I was used to measure the organizational culture. The

responses to this part are directly pertinent to the study. Part 2 of the inventory deals with

instruction. Therefore, this part was not used because the study does not directly address

instruction. It is only indirectly associated with instruction based on how teachers are

impacted by the organizational culture and leadership style. Part I ineludes questions #1-

60. Satisfaction, Commitment, Accomplishment, Recognition, Power, Affiliation, and

Strength of Culture will be used. There are a total of seven subscales or dimensions

measured in the inventory (Braskamp & Maehr, 1988).

Each of the following subseales are deseribed by Braskamp and Maehr (1988) in

the following manner. Affiliation refers to a feeling of trust and respect. There is a

cooperative effort to solve problems, make joint decisions, and share information. There

is a feeling that others care, as they work together in this environment. Power is described

70



as an emphasis on competition within the school. Recognition is being valued and

rewarded in their efforts. Teachers are recognized, encouraged and valued for their

efforts. Productivity is rewarded and a concrete reward system is a part of the school’s

environment. Commitment is described as loyalty and acceptance to one’s school. It

measures ownership to the school and pride in the school. Teachers having considerable

pride in working at their school believe strongly in the values of the school.

Accomplishment is considered as a school perceived to focus on quality and excellence.

People in the school are supportive of new ideas. Individuals are given the freedom to be

creative and innovative. Having concern about taking risks is not an issue. Individuals are

focused on a quality education. Strength of Climate is defined as strength within the

climate with clarity of the schools’ purposes and goals. Sharing functions to strengthen

individual and collective understanding of the groups’ culture. Satisfaction is described

as having to do with satisfaction on the job. It involves satisfaction with the work itself,

pay, promotions, supervision and coworkers (Braskamp & Maehr, 1988).

A table reflecting a set of tentative norms including both high and low items are

provided from the authors in their assessment. According to a description of uses of the

instrument, mean values can be used to compare macro ethos of the total organization to

the unit or micro ethos. High scores are an indicator of a strong belief in the particular

subscale or value and a strong ethos in the organization (Braskamp & Maehr, 1988).

There are several questions associated with each of the seven subscales of the

culture variable as measured on the Instructional Climate Inventory. The following

subscales are measured by the questions found in the inventory and numbered below:

Satisfaction is measured through numbers 1 ,3 ,6 ,9 ,10 ,15 ,17 ,21 ,42 and 43.

71



Commitment is measured through numbers 11,13,16, 33,41,49, 54, 56 and 57. Strength

of Climate is measured through numbers 5,18, 30, 35 and 39. Accomplishment is

measured through numbers 23,26, 27,29,40,47, 53, 55 and 60. Recognition is measured

through numbers 7, 8,19, 28,31, 36,45, 50 and 51. Power is measured through numbers

2,12,37,48 and 58. Affiliation is measured through numbers 4, 14,20, 22, 24,25, 32,

34, 38 and 46. Questions numbered 59, 52,44 and 24 are not represented in any of the

categories listed above.

The questionnaire is based on a Likert-type scale from A through E with the

following associations (A) Strongly Disagree, (B) Disagree, (C) Uncertain, (D) Agree,

(E) Strongly Agree. It is comprised of a 60-item questionnaire. In the Instructional

Climate Report, each of the scales is represented on a bar reflecting intervals of ten with

the 30 being the lowest number indicated and 70 being the highest (Insructional

Leadership, 1988). The numbers are listed as 30,40, 50,60, and 70. When the response

on the scale is high, it reflects strong agreement. When the response on the scale is low, it

represents strong disagreement (MetriTech, 1988). The survey has a few demographics.

They provided information on gender, teaching experience and degree earned, age, and

ethnicity. The researcher also added two more demographic questions including size of

the school and years in the building with the leader. Responses to this categorical data

could be useful in fiiture studies to determine additional relationships.

This completed study will provide correlations based on the responses to the five

subscales of Transformational Leadership Practices and the responses to the scales

derived from’the Instructional Climate Inventory. A composite score may be obtained in

the same manner as the Leadership Practices Inventory. Individual item scores will be

72



added to form the total subseale score’s of participants, they will be divided by the

number of items. The level on the Likert scale may then be identified.

Data Collection Procedure

Three strategies were used to collect survey data. The initial strategy involved

surveys being collected over a two-day period at a Michigan Education Association

(MEA) Conference held at the Hyatt Regency in Dearborn Michigan. Teachers

throughout the state of Michigan were in attendance. Flyers were used at the conference

site to advertise the surveys and raffle tickets for the grand prizes. Elementary teachers

were encouraged to visit the booth through the use of posters, flyers, and to observe

displays of raffle prize items. Participants completed surveys in the privacy of their

rooms or at the Terrace Room where private seating was available. Teachers were given a

packet with each coded survey to ensure that they were properly paired. Brief written

directions for completion were provided also, along with a pencil.

Participants were verbally advised that the procedure was voluntary and that they

could choose not to complete surveys at any time without consequences. They were

encouraged to fill out both inventories and immediately submit them in a box provided at

the booth. If they could not complete the surveys during the conference, they were

provided with a self-addressed stamped envelope. To ensure that the surveys were

randomly drawn with no more than one response per building, participants were asked to

list their building name and their city. Potential participants were requested to look over

the list. If their school appeared on the list they were asked not to complete the survey.

73



A brief note was included in the survey packet thanking participants for

completing the survey and pledging confidentiality. Participants were reassured of their

anonymity. Even though participants filled out a raffle ticket to enter the drawing, they

observed the tickets being placed in a separate box with no connection to the completed

form. Because the conference was in session for more than one day, this provided ample

opportunity for participants to complete the surveys. If participants were unable to

complete them during the conference, they were asked to request a pre-postage paid

envelope for mailing purposes. A smaller envelope with a raffle ticket would be enclosed.

They were instructed to place the completed raffle ticket in the larger envelope. Upon

receipt of the completed survey, the completed raffle ticket would be separated and

placed in a box for a drawing. Therefore participants would remain anonymous. The

return address was listed the same as the mailing address to ensure delivery.

In the second strategy, an advertisement placed in the Michigan Education

Association (MEA) Voice Magazine solicited elementary teachers individuals to

complete surveys. A toll-free telephone number was provided to call and provide a

mailing address and to receive the packet complete with surveys, instructions, raffle

tickets and a pre-addressed, stamped envelope. Completed surveys were collected

through return mailing.

The third and final strategy involved a personal appeal to teachers taking classes,

during the summer sessions, at Westem Michigan University. The data could have been

collected almost immediately, if students chose to do it during the class break or after

class. However, most of the surveys were completed and mailed. A pre-addressed.

74



S ta m p e d e n v e l o p e w a s p r o v i d e d w i t h o t h e r n e e e s s a r y m a t e r i a l s i n t h e p a c k e t f o r s u r v e y

p a r t i c i p a n t s .

Data Analysis

Overview

Initially, the study provided data on the leadership variable to be analyzed based

on composite scores and on subscale scores at three levels. The levels are small, average

and large. Next, the study provided data on the schools’ culture to be analyzed based on

composite scores and subscale scores at three levels. Additionally, the study utilized size

of enrollment as an intervening variable. The study defined population size of the school

500 and over as large, between 250 and 499 as average, and 249 and below as small.

Question #1

The questions read as follows: (la) What are teacher’s perceptions of their

principals’ leadership? (lb) Are there any differences among the elementary teachers

who work in schools of different sizes? For question #1 descriptive statistics are provided

for each of the five scales of leadership, as well as the total. An F-tests will be

conducted to inquire into whether teachers in three different sizes of schools perceive

leadership differently. The sizes of the schools will be categorized as small, average and

large. There will be a total of six F- tests for this one question. They include an F-test for

each of the five subscales and an F-test for the composite. The subscales are (a)

Challenging the Process (b) Inspiring a Shared Vision, (c) Enabling Others to Act, (d)

Encouraging the Heart and (e) Modeling the Way. The Leadership Practices Inventory

75



will be administered for this purpose. It is in written survey form. The teacher participant

was given a question soliciting the enrollment for the school. This made it possible to

code questionnaires relative to school enrollment to determine if teacher responses

reflected differences based on school size. The same question was attached to the second

instrument as well to insure consistency.

Question #2

The next questions are the basis for information on organizational culture. The

questions are as follows; (2a) What are teacher’s perceptions of their schools’ culture?

(2b) Are there any differences among elementary teachers who work in schools of

different sizes? Descriptive statistics are provided for the subscales of culture as well as

on the total. F-tests were conducted to inquire into whether teachers in three different

sizes of schools perceive it differently. There are a total of eight F tests for this question,

which include the seven subscales of organizational culture concerning (a) Satisfaction

(b) Commitment (c) Accomplishment (d) Recognition (e) Power (f) Affiliation (g)

Strength of Culture, and the composite. The Instructional leadership Inventory was

provided as a written survey for the teacher to complete on the culture variable. Because

both inventories were eoded and paired together, sehool size eould be identified for the

culture variable.

Question #3

The following question reflects the possibility of multiple relationships between

subscales on culture and the subscales of leadership. The question reads as follows: (3)

76



Are there any relationships between the principals’ leadership and schools’ culture? A

canonical correlation was conducted to inquire into possible relationships. The analysis

reveals how the elements in leadership are related to elements in school culture.

The purpose of using canonical correlation in this study is to compare whether there are

groups of leadership variables on one side and related groups of culture variables on the

other. Variables are combined to form groups to produce a predicted value. The predicted

value is found with the highest correlation to the predicted value for the group on the

other side. The grouping or combination of variables may be thought of as a dimension

that relates the variables on one side to variables on the other side. Variables in Canonical

correlations are referred to as variates. The combinations of the variables are linear in

nature. A canonical correlation can be thought of as a descriptive technique (Tabachnick

& Fidell, 1989).

This canonical correlation involved the specific elements/subscales within

Transformational Leadership and Organizational culture. This part of the study involves a

correlation between all subscales on both variables to determine what, if any,

relationships exist. The data was drawn on the aforementioned individual instruments for

each variable. The subscales of Transformational Leadership include (a) Challenging the

Process, (b) Inspiring a Shared Vision, (c) Enabling Others to Act, (d) Encouraging the

Heart, and (e) Modeling the Way. The subscales of Organizational Culture include (a)

Satisfaction, (b) Commitment, (c) Accomplishment, (d) Recognition, (e) Power, (f)

Affiliation, and (g) Strength of Culture. The question representing the subscale-to-

subscale relationship focus on whether there is a relationship between Challenging the

Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, Enabling Others to Act, Encouraging the Heart, and

77



Modeling the Way individually or in any combination with any of the subscales of

Culture including Satisfaction, Commitment, Strength of Climate, Accomplishment,

Recognition, Power, and Affiliation.

For an added dimension, the study inquired into whether any of the relationships

investigated vary along the intervening variable of school size. School size is an

interesting concept to explore because in small schools there could be more opportunities

to share, collaborate, obtain recognition, exercise affiliation and more. In larger populated

schools, it would appear more difficult to address these issues due to the complexities

accompanying large numbers. Therefore, school size might impact the correlational

findings among particular subscales of Transformational Leadership and Organizational

Culture.

In this study, there was an expected impact with the introduction of the

intervening variable of school population size. Additional categorical variables could also

introduce interesting findings in future studies as well. Here, a large school would be

defined as a population of 500 or larger. An average school was considered between 250

and 499, a small school population would be 249 or less.

In summary, the methodology chapter has outlined the procedure upon which the

study took place. Detailed description/information has been provided as part of the

Selection of Subjects, Instrumentation, Measurement, and Data Collection Procedure.

The following chapter identifies and respond to the questions identified for the study. It

will provide the results of descriptive statistic, F-Tests and canonical correlations for the

study, as well as, analysis and interpretation.

78



CHAPTER IV

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

The three research questions for the study will be presented in this chapter. A

description of the population/ response rate of the various sources ifrom which the data

was collected will be provided. Results of the hypothesis testing and analysis Will also be

presented accompanied by interpretations of the results

Purpose

The overall piupose of the study was to determine if there was a relationship

between Organizational Culture and Transformational Leadership. The instruments used

were The Leadership Practices Inventory for the leadership component and The

Instructional Climate Inventory for the culture component. The study’s purpose was also

to find whether teacher’s perceptions of school leadership and organizational culture

varied depending on school size.

Sample Description

The sample was comprised of 121 pairings of responses to the Leadership

Practices Inventory and the Instructional Climate Inventory from teachers throughout the

state of Michigan. Because the sample was taken from three different settings, it could

best be defined as a sample of convenience. The primary population from which the

sample was taken involved public, elementary schoolteachers who attended a Michigan

Education Association (MEA) Conference. Additional surveys were administered to

79



those who responded to an advertisement in the MEA Voice Magazine. Finally, surveys

were taken from graduate classes of educational leadership at Westem Michigan

University. Therefore, the sample range encompassed a variety of settings. Sxirvey

participants were not restricted to particular geographic regions within the state of

Michigan. Therefore responses should represent urban, rural and suburban teacher

populations. The data presented were based on the collection of perceptions of one

teacher per individual school.

Instruments

Teachers’ perceptions of differences were identified on the culture and leadership

inventories. The Leadership Practices Inventory used a Likert scale from 1-10 to account

for differences. The scale measures from 1 (almost never) to 10 (almost always). The

Instructional Climate Inventory accounted for differences through a Likert scale ranging

from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Rate of Sample Retum/Response

The participant response to the initial attempt to secure a sample came from a

state-wide. Professional Development Conference sponsored by the Michigan Education

Association (MEA) and resulted in 66 pairs of surveys being completed and retumed out

of a possible 125. The participant response was admirable considering that there were

more than ninety questions. The retum rate was likely enhanced by the fact that it was a

three-day Professional Development Conference held at the Hyatt Regency Hotel where

individuals had an opportunity to pick them up one day and retum them the next day.

80



Offering an incentive of a television and VCR \vas useful in motivating potential

participants to answer ninety seven questions. Approximately ten completed surveys

were retumed from the advertisement from the Michigan Education Association Voice

magazine over a span of IV2 months. The third and final group of surveys came from

teachers who attended Summer 1 and Summer II classes at Westem Michigan University.

The remaining 45 surveys were retumed after dispensing 75. The response rate was

probably enhanced by a personal appeal from their fellow student and teacher. Only two

pairs of surveys had to be thrown out because in both cases the teacher only filled out one

of the two surveys. Surveys were checked for completion upon receipt, at the initial

conference site. Participants were asked to complete any missed questions. Most of the

remaining surveys from the second and third survey gathering strategies were received by

mail.

The Relationship Between Teacher’s Perceptions of Leadership and the School Size

Question #1

What is the teacher’s perception of their principal’s leadership? Are there any

differences among the elementary teachers who work in schools of different sizes?

Basic Statistics for the Subscale and Composite for the Leadership

Practice Inventorv. Table 1 reflects basic statistics as a result of teachers’ responses to the

Leadership Survey. The responses all tend to be moderately high. On a scale of 1 to 10

the means of all the subscales were above 6.500. They ranged from 6.580 (the lowest) to

81



7.426 (the highest). Participants produced the highest mean score of 7.426 in the subscale

Enabling Others to Act, closely followed by Modeling the Way (M=7.083). The lowest

means were for Challenging the Process (M = 6.580) and Inspiring a Shared Meaning

(M=6.606).

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics for Transformational Leadership Subscale ScoresSubseales Descriptive Standard Deviation No. of

ResponsesChallenge the Process Mean 6.580 2.074 121

Median 7.000Mode 8.330

Inspire Shared Vision Mean 6.606 2.250 121Median 7.000Mode 6.170

Enabling Others to Act Mean 7.426 1.990 121Median 8.000Mode 8.000

Model the Way Mean 7.083 1.926 121Median 7.500Mode 6.330

Encourage the Heart Mean 6.892 2.319 121Median 7.330Mode 8.830

* Composite Leadership Scores

Mean 6.918 1.966 121

Median 7.530Mode 8.870

Kouzes and Posner (1995) describe what a high score means in each of the

subscales. Teachers’ responses to the surveys in this study within the Enabling Others to

Act subscale indicate that participants felt their leaders enabled or allowed them to

develop cooperative relationships, demonstrate active listening, and consider varying

points of view. Based on their responses teachers felt that leaders supported their

decisions, allowed choices about how to work, encouraged individuals to develop new

skills, and treated them respectfully and with dignity. Teacher’s beliefs represented in the

82



second highest mean score of 7.083 found in Modeling the Way demonstrated that

leaders set clear goals, divided tasks into smaller milestones, and practiced his or her

beliefs.

Comparing Across Schools at Different Sizes

The F-Test is used for comparing school sizes for the leadership variable based on

teachers’ responses on the Leadership Practice Inventory. Table 2 depicts the F-Value

and the P-Value for each of the five subscales for the leadership variable and in the

leadership composite score. Also included are the mean score for large, medium and

small school sizes.

Table 2. Summary of F-test Results for Comparing School Sizes in Terms of the Leadership Practices Inventory (LPI) Subscale and Composite Scores

SUBSCALE MeanLarge

MeanMedium

MeanSmall

F- Value P-Value

Challenging the Process 6.627 6.845 5.220 4.00 0.0209*Inspiring a Shared Vision 6.685 6.911 4.978 4.90 0.0090*Enabling Others to Act 7.448 7.654 6.300 2.96 0.0555Modeling the Way 6.909 7.443 5.788 5.10 0.0075*Encouraging the Heart 7.015 7.086 5.688 2.37 0.0979Leadership Composite 6.936 7.188 5.596 4.28 0.0160*♦Significant at the 5% level

Among the five subscales and the composite, six F-Tests were administered, each

based on 118 degrees of freedom. Four results are statistically significant, at .05 level of

significance. These are on Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, and

Modeling the Way and the Leadership Composite. Therefore, pairwise comparisons of

83



teachers, based on the Post-Hoc Test, were run to determine where the differences

occurred.

Pairwise Comparisons

Post Hoc analysis was done to determine between which groups the differences

occurred. The following Table 2a show all possible pairwise combinations based on the

three levels of size for Challenging the Process. Additionally mean scores and mean

differences are shown for various sizes along with T and P- Values.

Table 2a. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Challenging the Process (cproc) Subscale

PAIRWISE COMPARISON with Means

MeanDifference

t-value P-value

Small (5.220 ) vs Medium ( 6.845) -1.624 -2.45a 0.0249*Small (5.220 ) vs Large ( 6.627) -1.407 -2.07 0.0436*Medium (6.845 ) vs Large (6.627) 0.2176 0.54 0.5931

a—using Sattherhwaite Method * Significant at 5% level of significance

The Pairwise Comparisons for Challenging the Process indicate that small vs.

large and small vs medium are statistically significant at the .05 level. As far as

Challenging the Process is concerned, teachers in small schools gave a lower rating to the

principals than did their counterparts in medium sized or large schools.

Table 2b reveal every possible pairwise comparison for Inspiring a Shared Vision.

Additionally mean scores and mean differences are shown for various sizes along with T

and P- Values.

84



Table 2b. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Inspiring a Shared Vision (vision) Subscale

PAIRWISE COMPARISON MeanDifference

t-value P- value

Small (4.978) vs Medium(6.911) -1.933 -2.58a 0.0192*Small (4.978 ) vs Large (6.685) -1.707 -2.36 0.0226*Medium (6.911) vs Large (6.685) 0.2257 0.52 0.6027a— using Sattherthwaite Method *Signicant at 5% level of significance

The pairwise comparison for Inspiring a Shared Vision also reveal that responses

from medium and large schools do not differ significantly at the .05 level of significance.

However small vs large and small vs medium comparisons are statistically significant at

the .05 level of significance.

As far as Inspiring a Shared Vision is concerned, teachers in small schools gave a

lower rating to the principals than did teachers in medium sized or large schools.

Table 2c summarizes each pairwise comparison for Modeling the Way.

Additionally mean scores and mean differences are shown for various sizes along with T

and P- Values.

Table 2c. Post-hoc T-test Results for the LPI Modeling the Way Subscale

PAIRWISE COMPARISON MeanDifference

t-value P-value

Small ( 5.788) vs Medium (7.443) -1.655 -3.09 0.0027*Small (5.788 ) vs Large (6.909) -1.121 -1.93 0.0596Medium (7.443 ) vs Large (6.909) 0.5341 1.41 0.1618

♦Signify at 5% ievei of significance

The last Pairwise Comparison, Modeling the Way, only reveal a significant

difference at the .05 level between small and medium sehool size teachers. Again, the

teachers are small district had a lower mean.

85



Results for Post-hoc comparisons on the leadership composite are represented in

Table 2d below. Included are the number of surveys in each category, the standard

deviation, as well as, the mean score and the mean difference.

Table 2d. Post Hoc T-Test for the Leadership Composite

Size No. of Surveys

Mean StandardDeviation

T- Value P- Value

Small 15 5596 2.143Medium 71 7.188 1.922Difference -1.592 -2.86 0.0054*Small 15 5596 2.143Large 35 6936 1.794Difference -1.341 -2.28 0.0269*Medium 71 7.188 1.922Large 35 6.936 1.794Difference 0.2515 0.65 0.5191

In the Post Hoc T-Test for the Leadership Composites (Table 2d), there is a

significant difference between small vs medium and between small vs large. Again, it is

the teachers from small schools who differed from their counterparts in medium sized or

large schools. Therefore, the results are essentially consistent throughout whether

considering pairwise comparisons based on the subseale values or the Leadership

Composite scores. Teachers’ perceptions of leadership in small-sized schools were

statistically different when compared to medium-sized schools and large sized schools.

An interpretation might be that teachers in small sized schools perceive less

transformational type of leadership

86



The Relationship Between Teacher’s Perceptions of Culture (Composite and Subscales) and the School Size

Question #2

What is the teacher’s perception of their school’s culture? Are there any


Basic Statistics for Organizational Culture

These statistics are based on the teacher’s responses to the Instructional Climate

Inventory. The inventory is based on a Likert scale of 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly

Agree).

The results of Table 3 are based on a Likert scale from 1 to 5. The responses fail

within a range of 2.400 to 3.716. The highest mean score is foxmd in Strength of Climate.

Strength of Climate is based on clear goals and purposes for the school. Those who score

high in this area are certain they understand what the school stands for. The lowest mean

score in this study is foimd in the Power subscale.

Comparing Schools of Various Sizes

Table 4 shows the F-Value and P-Value for each of the seven subscales on the

culture variable and the culture composite.

87



Table 3. Descriptive Statistics for Organizational Culture Subscale Scores

SUBSCA LE DESCRIPTIVE STANDARDDEVIATION

N o. o f Surveys

Satisfaction Mean 3.606 0.565 121Median 3.700Mode 4.100

Commitment Mean 3.598 0.449 121Median 3.700Mode 3.440

Strength of Climate Mean 3.716 0.818 121Median 3.800Mode 4.200

Accomplishment Mean 3.558 0.591 121Median 3.670Mode 3.670

Recognition Mean 3.260 0.740 121Median 3.330Mode 3.560

Power Mean 2.411 0.650 121Median 2.400Mode 2.400

Affiliation Mean 3.387 0.653 121Median 3.440Mode 3.220

Table 4. Summary of F-Test Results for Comparing School Sizes in Terms of the Organizational Culture Subscale Variables

SUBSCALE MeanLarge

MeanMedium

MeanSmall

F-Value P-Value

Satisfaction 3.520 3.667 3.513 1.03 0.3601Commitment 3.530 3.656 3.481 1.51 0.2246Strength of Culture 3.600 3.800 3.587 0.91 0.4040Accomplishment 3.460 3.654 3.353 2.56 0.0816Recognition 3.269 3.320 2.962 1.46 0.2363Power 2.428 2.411 2.393 0.04 0.9634Affiliation 3.296 3.466 3.230 1.30 0.2764Culture Composite 6.627 6.845 5.220 1.78 0.1735♦Significant at the5% level of significance

88



To determine the effect of school size hased on the teacher’s responses on each of

the subscales and the composite variables, F-test were performed. Table 4 showed that

subscale scores and the composite score were not significantly different at the .05 level

of significance. Thus, it was not necessary to perform pair-wise comparisons for the

school sizes, through Post -Hoc multiple comparisons.

There is less than a 0.25 mean difference between all of the size levels for

culture. Thus, overall, based on the analyses made, there are no significant differences

among the elementary teachers who work in schools of different sizes, in terms of how

they perceive their school’s culture.

The Relationship Between Leadership Subscales and Culture Subscales

Question #3

Are there any relationships between principals’ leadership and the schools

culture?

In this study, canonical correlations were made based on the subscales of

Principal’s leadership and the school’s culture. Subscales in the leadership variables total

five including Challenging the Process (cproc). Inspiring a Shared Vision (vision),

Enabling Others to Act (act), Modeling the Way (way), and Encouraging the Heart

(heart). The second set of variables are comprised of seven subscales for the Culture

including Satisfaction (sat). Commitment (com), Strength of Climate (stmgth).

Accomplishment (accom). Recognition (rec). Power (power), and Affiliation (affil).

89



Among several eanonieal variate pairs there is only one signifieant pair, at the 5%

level of signifieance. This implies that there is only one reliable dimension that could

explain the relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational

Culture.

The canonical loadings of the identified variate pair are given in Table 5. It

appears that all of the subscales of Transformational Leadership are more highly

correlated to the Leadership variate, than the Organizational Culture subscales are to the

Culture variate. In particular, the subscale “Encouraging the Heart” has the highest

correlation of 0.963 to the Leadership variate, followed by “Enabling others to Act”,

which is 0.944. The Leadership variate accounts for 79.96% (Proportion of raw variance)

of the variations of perceived behaviors in Transformational Leadership, while it could

explain 42.88% of the variations of behavior in Organizational Culture. On the other

hand, the subseale “Recognition” has the highest correlation of 0.8567, with the Culture

variate, followed by “Affiliation” (0.8299) and “Accomplishment” (0.7999). This Culture

variate aceovmts for 38.86% of the variations in behavior within the Organizational

Culture, while it could explain 20.84% of the variance in Transformational Leadership. It

is important to note that Power does not seem to play a big role in Organizational Culture

(since loading is only -0.0886).

The reliable canonical variate pair has an overall correlation of 0.7323, which

indicates a moderately high relationship between leadership and organizational culture.

Based on a cut-off score of .5, the author found that the cultural elements of

“accomplishment”, “recognition”, and “affiliation” tend to be positively correlated with

all aspects of transformational leadership.

90



Table 5. Canonical Correlation between Leadership and Organizational Culture

VARIABLE SUBSCALES CANONICALSET VARIATE AND

LOADINGSChallenging the process 0.8445Inspiring a shared vision 0.8762

Leadership Enabling others to act 0.9443Modeling the way 0.8350

Encouraging the heart 0.9634Proportion of Raw Variance Explained 0.7996

Redundancy 0.4288Satisfaction 0.5386

Commitment 0.3967Strength 0.4499

Aeeomplishment 0.7999Culture Recognition 0.8567

Power -0.0886Affiliation 0.8299

Proportion of Raw Variance Explained 0.3886Redundancy 0.2084Correlation 0.7323

Summary of the Questions & Responses

Question #1

What is the teacher’s perception of their principals’ leadership (descriptive for the

composite as well as the subscales)? Are there any differences among the elementary

teachers who work in schools of different sizes (F-test for three levels for the composite

as well as the subseale)?

Three of the five leadership variables including Challenge the Process, Inspiring a

Shared Vision and Modeling the Way showed statistically signifieant differences at the

.05 level on the F-Test. Also Post hoc T-tests revealed differences in five of nine possible

combinations including Challenging the Process and Inspiring a Shared Vision with

91



differences in the small vs large pairings and the small vs medium pairings. Modeling the

Way showed a statistically significant difference between small vs medium school size

teachers. Therefore, partial support was found for this question.

In terms of teachers’ perception on Challenge the Process, Inspire a Shared

Vision, and Model the Way, teachers in small schools tend to be significantly less

inclined to view principals as being transformational in their leadership. Whereas

teachers in large and medium - sized schools are more inclined to view their leaders as

transformational leaders.

Question #2

What is the teacher’s perception of their school’s culture? Are there any


There were no significant differences at the .05 level on any of the seven

subscales (Satisfaction, Commitment, Strength of Culture, Accomplishment,

Recognition, Power, and Affiliation). Therefore, based on this study, size is not related to

teacher’s perception of the school’s culture. The Culture Composite score was not

statistically significant at the .05 level either.

Question #3

The final question provided insight into whether there is a correlation between

leadership qualities and school culture. Question #3 Is there any relationships between

principal’s leadership and school’s culture (canonical correlation)?

92


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CLFLTURE

One statistically significant pairing resulted from the canonical correlation. The

overall correlation was 0.732 at the .05 level of significance. This statistically significant

pair of canonical variates mean that the cultural elements of “accomplishment”,

“recognition” and “affiliation” are related to the transformational leadership.

93



CHAPTERV

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS, STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS

Summary and Interpretations

Summary

The Study

This study is based upon a myriad of longstanding problems and eoncems that

continue to plague education imtil today; they include changing demographies, lack of

support, isolation, Ioav teacher morale and attrition. This is an important study because it

attempts to identify relationships that address these longstanding problems. The yery crux

of identifying and proyiding solutions for a successful educational system may hinge

upon a clearer understanding of issues that put A Nation at Risk in the 1980’s (Owens,

1991) and place A Nation Still at Risk as we approached the year 2000 (A Nation, 1999).

This study is worthwhile because it addresses issues that continue to threaten the well

being of a nation. The effects of these longstanding problems that defme the educational

landscape and architecture from the past, in the present, and possibly into the future must

be addressed.

Because teachers teach under the auspices of their principal, it is that primary

relationship upon which this study situates its focus. The study necessarily attempts to

understand a specific type of principals’ leadership style and the relationship between

how teachers pereeiye the school culture and how they pereeiye the principal’s

leadership. Additionally, the study attempts to understand any relationship that school

94



size might have on teacher’s perception of their principal’s leadership and organizational

culture.

The Research Questions are as follows:

1) What are teacher’s perceptions of their principal’s leadership ? Are there any

differences among elementary teachers who work in schools of different sizes ?

2) What are teacher’s perceptions of their school’s culture? Are there any differences

among the elementary teachers who work in schools of different sizes?

3) Are there any relationships between principals’ leadership and schools’ culture?

The overall sample was a convenience sample of elementary, public school

teachers, currently teaching in the state of Michigan. Completed surveys came from three

sources. A statewide Professional Development Conference for the entire state of

Michigan was the initial source, as well as, the primaiy source for most completed

surveys. 69 surveys were returned. The second source of respondents came from the

Michigan Education Association magazine, the MEA Voice. This magazine is available

to teachers over the state of Michigan. 11 surveys were retumed. The third source of

respondents came from teachers attending classes at Westem Michigan University during

the summer sessions. 41 surveys were retumed.

Data collection procedures were in place at each of the settings identified to

obtain the completed surveys. Pre-addressed, stamped envelopes were offered to those

wishing to participate in a retum mailing. However, all teachers retumed completed

surveys while in attendance at the MEA Conference site at the Hyatt Regency in

Dearbom, Michigan. In the next setting, teachers who requested the surveys based on

advertisement in the MEA Voice magazine retumed the completed surveys in the pre-

95



addressed, stamped envelope that had been provided. The final data collection was based

on the researcher’s personal appeal to teachers to complete surveys, at Westem Michigan

University. Most all surveys were collected by retum mail in the pre-addressed, stamped

envelopes provided.

Three tests statistics were used for the study. The data analysis was based on an F-

Test to determine if a statistically significant difference occurred at the .05 level of

significance for principal’s leadership and organizational culture. This was followed by a

Post Hoc Analysis T-Test for pairwise comparisons to determine where the differences

occurred based on school size.

The data analysis for the canonical correlation was based on the subscales of

organizational culture in relation to the culture variable. Additionally, the correlation was

based on the subscales of Transformational Leadership in relationship to the leadership

variable. The analysis attempted to find statistically significant variates.

The Findings

Research Question No. 1

Public elementary school teachers tend to rate their principals moderately high for

their principals’ leadership. On a 10-point Likert scale, the mean ranged fi'om 6.580 to

7.426. The Likert scale rating indicates 1 as almost never and 10 as almost always. The

mean for the composite leadership score is 6.918 substantiating A moderately high

rating.. Furthermore, the mean for three of the five subscales including. Encouraging the

Heart, Modeling the Way and Enabling Others to Act with scores of 6.892, 7.083 and

96



7.426 respectively indicate the highest mean ratings. The lowest mean score of 6.580 for

Challenging the Process indicate that the rating was moderately high.

F-test were statistically significant for three of our subscales, (a) Challenging the

Process (h) Inspiring a Shared Meaning and (c) Modeling the Way. Post Hoc multiple

comparisons reveal that it was essentially the small schools that differed from the

medium-sized and the large-sized schools. Small-sized schools in five of the six possible

pairings involving small-sized schools reveal that the teachers are less inclined to view

their leadership as transformational. Here, teachers in small schools specifically indicated

that they perceived their principal’s as less likely to challenge the status quo and provide

opportunities to develop meaning as an outgrowth of a shared perspective. Additionally,

they perceived their principals as less likely to demonstrate through their actions the

philosophies that they espoused.

Research Question No. 2

Public elementary school teachers gave moderately high ratings to their school

culture. The mean scores were based on a 5-point Likert scale. The scale ranged from (A)

Almost Never to (E) Almost Always. For purposes of statistical analysis A and E were 1

and 5 respectively. Six out of seven mean scores were above a 3.000 rating. Four of the

seven mean scores were above 3.500.The highest scores range from Strength of Climate

to Satisfaction followed by Commitment with scores of 3.716, 3.606 and 3.598

respectively. Strength of Climate indicates whether teachers perceive their culture as

having clear goals and purposes. Here, teachers perceived their culture as one with

97



moderately high levels of satisfaetion and commitment with the highest perception of

Strength of Climate.

F-tests revealed that there is no relationship between any of the subscales of

organizational culture and the school size. There appears to be a homogenization in the

perception of school culture. Based on this study, size is not related to the teacher’s

perception of the school culture. Consequently, regardless of the classification of small,

medium or large-sized schools, size is not related to the teacher’s perception of the

culture of the school. The P-value for each of the subscales was below the .05 level of

significance.

Research Question No.3

The canonical correlation analysis reveals that there is a relationship between

teachers’ perceptions of their principals’ leadership and organizational culture. The study

found one statistically significant canonical variate. A close inspection of the loadings

reveal that the higher ratings teachers gave to the following three cultural elements

(recognition, affiliation, accomplishment), the higher ratings they tend to give to their

principals’ transformational leadership. The analysis provides evidence that there is a

relationship between organizational culture and leadership.

Discussion

The teachers tend to be satisfied with their organizational culture and principal’s

leadership. Here, teachers are most satisfied with Encouraging the Heart, Modeling the

Way, and Enabling Others to Act as reflected in their ratings. Perhaps teachers are

98



saying that when leaders are coneemed enough to provide encouragement, guide them in

a consistent manner and support them as they take action, a feeling of satisfaction

follows. Perhaps, it is the personal nature of the relationship that is reflected in

Encouraging, Modeling, and Enabling that help to create an even higher score/feeling of

satisfaction. Even though Encouraging, Modeling, and Enabling could be demonstrated

toward the entire group, each could be demonstrated one-on-one. In the organizational

culture the three highest scores were Strength of Climate, Satisfaction and Commitment.

Strength of Climate reflects clear goals and purposes. Making a commitment to work

hard within the culture would appear easier if goals and purposes were clear. Satisfaetion

could come from making a commitment toward the goals.

Where principal’s leadership is concerned, teachers from medium-sized and leirge

schools tend to give higher ratings than do their counterparts in small districts in the area

of Challenging the Process, Inspiring a Shared Vision, and Modeling the Way. It appears

that principals in small schools are perceived less transformational than their counterparts

in medium-sized and large schools. Perhaps, this is because smaller-sized schools would

be less likely to receive current research or information based on new methods and ideas.

Perhaps, many of the small-sized schools are in rural areas where schools are less likely

to come together to challenge and stimulate one another’s thinking. The more isolated or

remote rural settings may contribute to this occurrence.

The study also foimd that the higher the ratings teachers gave to the following

three cultural elements (recognition, affiliation, accomplishment) the higher ratings they

tended to give to their principals’ transformational leadership. Teachers’ perception of

organizational culture and principals’ leadership are, indeed, related. Although the study

99



cannot suggest causality, we have some evidence to suggest the interplay between

shaping some aspects of the culture and displaying transformational leadership.

Based on this finding, it would appear that the more transformational the

leadership, the more positive the culture will be. The results of this study tend to indicate

that if the teacher perceives the principal’s as more transformational, they tend to rate the

following three elements higher - recognition, affiliation and accomplishment - for the

school culture, might have even higher scores.

Strengths and Limitations

Strengths

(A) A unique strength of the study was based on a design feature that required one

teacher from each school to complete the pair of surveys. As a result, many schools (121)

were represented in this statewide study.

(B) This study was also unique because it is among the first attempts to

establish a relationship between organizational culture and leadership. The study was not

designed to identify the teachers’ perception of the relationship between leadership and

culture within one particular school. It was not designed to assess an individual principal.

The researcher attempted to create an informational study that would help readers to

understand the relationship between these two variables over a number of public,

elementary schools within the state of Michigan.

(C) An additional strength of this study is that various lengths of teaching

experience were represented in the sample as supported by the following facts. 81%

100


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLFLTURE

teachers worked in the same building for over three years. 41% have more than 12 years

teaching experience.

Limitations

(A) The sample was a convenience sample based on collections from three

settings.

(B) Only elementary schools were utilized for the time being. The study could be

extended to other school levels and other types of organizations.

(C) Just surveys were used. Further studies could use qualitative methods to study

why the relationship between organizational culture and leadership display such a pattern.

(D) Requesting survey participants to provide exact numbers for school

population.

101



REFERENCES

A Nation Still at Risk (1999). U.S. Maryland Office of Educational Research and Improvement. Report Number EDO-TM-99-02. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED429988).

Ainscow, M. & Southworth, G. (1996). School Improvement: A study of the roles of leaders and external consultants. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7(3), 229-251.

Akuchie, L. U. (1986). Attrition of beginning teachers in Owerri school district, Imo State Nigeria. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas South University, 1986). Dissertation Abstracts International, 47, llA-3914.

Anderson, C. (1982). The search for climate: A review of the research. Review o f Educational Research, 52 (3), 368-420.

Argjris, C. & Schon, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: theory, method and practice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Bennis, W. «& Nanus, B. (1985). Leaders. New York: Harper and Row.

Bacharach, S. B. and others (1986). The learning workplace: The conditions and resources of teaching. New York (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED279614).

Baker, D. P. & Smith, T. (1997) Trend 1: the condition of academic achievement in the nation. Teachers College, 99(1), 14-18.

Barker, B. (2001). Do leaders matter? Educational Review, 53 (1), 65-76.

Bass, B.M.(1985). Leadership and performance beyond expectations^ New York: Free Press.

Blase, J. & Kirby, P.C. (1992). The power of praise - a strategy for effective principals. National Association o f Secondary School Principals Bulletin, 76 (548), 69-77.

Bobbit, S.A., Faupel, E., and Bums, S. (1991). Characteristics o f stayers, movers andleavers. Results from teacher follow-up survey: 1988-1989. Washington, D.C., NationalCenter for Educational Statistics (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED335-411).

Borg, W. R. & Gall, D. M. (1989). Educational Research. (5* Ed.) New York: Simon & Schuster.

102



Bradshaw, L.K. (2000). The changing role of principals in school partnerships. NASSP Bulletin, 84 (616), 86-96.

Braskamp, L.A. & Maehr, M. L. (1988). Instructional Climate Inventory. Champaign, IL: Metri-Tech.

Bridges, E.M. (1980). Job Satisfaction and teacher absenteeism. Educational Administration Quarterly, 16 (2), 41-56.

Bridges, E. M. & Hallinan, M. T. (1978). Subunit size, work systems interdependence, and employee absenteeism. Educational Administration Quarterly, 14 (2), 24-42.

British Joumal (2001). Teaching approaches which support inclusive education; A connective pedagogy. British Journal o f Special Education 28 (2), 55-59.

Bromley, D. B. (2001). Relationships between personal and corporate reputation. European Journal o f Marketing, 35 (3-4), 316-334.

Brown, D. F. (1995). Experiencing shared leadership: Teachers’ reflections. Journal o f School Leadership, 5, 334-355.

Burch, C.R. (1993). The early years of teaching: A study of the conditions affecting beginning teacher retention(mentors, classroom management. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Laveme, 1993). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 05A-1150

Bums, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper and Row.

Campo, C. (1991). Motivation and commitment: Factors in determining how principals foster collaborative school cultures. Unpublished thesis. University of Nijmeyen, The Netherlands; OISE, Toronto.

Cascadden, D. S. (1998). Principals and managers and leaders: A qualitative study of the perspectives of selected elementary school principals. Journal o f School Leadership, 8 (2). 137-170.

Chapman, D. W. (1982) Career satisfaction of teachers. Educational Research Quarterly, 7 (3), 40-50.

Chapman D.W. & Green, M.S. (1986). Journal o f Educational Research Quarterly, 1 (3), 40-50.

Chapman, D.W. & Hutcheson, S.M. (1982). Attrition from teaching careers adiscriminant analysis. American Educational Research Journal. 19 (1), 93-105.

103



Chapman, D.W. & Lowther, M.A. (1982). Teacher’s satisfaction with teaching. Journal o f Educational Research, 75,241-247.

Cheng, Y. C. (1994). Principal’s leadership as a critical factor for school performance: Evidence from multi-levels of primary schools. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5(3), 299-317.

Cheloha, R. S., & Farr, J. L. (1980). Absenteeism job involvement, and job satisfaction in an organizational setting. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 65, 467-473.

Chui, H. S., & Others (1996). Vision and leadership of principals in Hong Kong. Journal o f Educational Administration, 34(5), 30-48.

Clinton, W. (1996). President Clinton urges standards that count: Excerpts from president Clinton’s address to the national education summit. American Educator, 20 (1), 8- 12.

Clegg, C.W. (1983). Psychology of employee lateness, absence, and turnover: Amethodological critique and an empirical study. Journal o f Applied Psychology, 68, 88- 101.

Conley, D.T. & Goldman, P. (1994). Facilitative leadership: How principals lead without dominating. OSSC Bulletin, 37 (9), 52.

Connolly, R.A. (1995). A qualitative study of the factors that influence 3* year teachers to remain in or to leave teaching (attrition) (Doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56, 08A-2946.

Corley, E. L. (1998). First year teachers: strangers in strange lands: (High School teachers, power, classroom). DAI 59 (7A). Miami University.

Cresswell, J. & Fisher, D. (1996, April). Relationships between principals’ interpersonal behavior with teachers and the school environment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

Crum-mack, M.A. (1993). First-year teachers - former teacher cadets: their perceptions, concerns, and career plans (recruitment) (Doctoral dissertation. University of South Carolina, 1995). Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, llA-3939.

David, Tom (2000, Spring). Programs in practice: Teacher mentoring benefits all around. Kappa Delta Pi Record, 36 (3), 134-136.

104



Davis, C. (1997). An analysis of selected variables regarding teacher absenteeism in selected urban elementary schools in urban education (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Southern University, 1997). Dissertation Abstracts International 58, 09A- 3376.

Dinham, S., Caimey, T.„ Craifgie, D., & Wilson, S. (1995). School climate and leadership: Research into three secondary schools. Journal o f Educational Administration 55(4), 36-58.

Dufour, R. P. (1986). Must principals choose between teacher morale and an effective school? National Association o f Secondary School Principals, 33-37.

Duttweiler, P.C. (1986). Educational excellence and motivating teachers. The Clearing House, 29, 371-374.

Furtwengler, W. J. & Hurst, D. (1992). Leadership for school quality- personal challenge, the missing factor. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Foldesy, G. & Foster L. (1989). The impact, causes and prevention of excessive teacher absenteeism. Clearinghouse, 63, 82-86.

Ford, G. (1976). Remarks of the president: Education’s role in our nation’s progress for the future. NASSP Bulletin, 60 (400), 1-5.

Frantz, C.D. (1994). New teacher attrition: The case of Louisiana (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 55, 09A - 2658.

French, N. K. (1987). A study of teacher stress and stress reactions ( DoctoralDissertation, University of Denver, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 48„ 10a.

Fried, J. (1993). Bridging emotion and intellect: Classroom diversity in progress. College Teaching, 41 (4).

Fullan, M.G. (1992). Visions that blind. Educational Leadership, 49 (5), 19-22.

Gardner, J. (1990). On leadership. New York: The Free Press.

George, P.S. (2001). A+ accountability in Florida. Educational Leadership, 59 (1), 28-32.

Gioia, D. A.,Schultz, M. & Corley, K. G. (2000). Organizational identity, image and adaptive instability. The Academy o f Management Review, 25 (1), 63-81.

105



Goldring; E.B. & Pasternack, R. (1994). Principals’ coordinating strategies and school effectiveness. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 5 (3), 239-253.

Grossman, R. (1999, February). Heirs unapparent. HR Magazine 44 (2), 36-44.

Guzman, N. (1997). Leadership for successful inclusive school: A study of principal behaviors. Journal o f Educational Administration, 35 (5), 439-450.

Hackett, R. D. (1989). Work attitude and employee absenteeism: A synthesis of the literature. Journal o f Occupational Psvcholosv. 62,235-248.

Hamel, G. (2000, September 4). Driving Grassroots Growth. Fortune Magazine. 142 (5), 173-187.

Harris, C.E. (1998). Teacher turnover: Factors related to attrition and retention of North Carolina teaching fellows. Dissertation Abstracts International, 5 8 ,12A-4508.

Haselkom, D. (1994). Shaping the profession that shapes America’s future NCATE Quality Teaching, 4(V) 1-2,10-12.

Heyns, B. (1988) Educational defectors: A first look at attrition in the nls-72. Educational Reasearcher, 17 (3), 24-32.

Hipp, K. A. (1996^. Teacher Efficacy: Influence o f principal leadership behavior. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, NY.

Hinings, C. R. & Greenwood, R. (1998). The dynamics o f strategic change. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

Hodgkinson, H. (1989). The same client: The demographics of education and service delivery systems. Center for Demographic Police, Institute for Educational Leadership. Washington, D.C.

Hoy, W. & Brown, B. L. (1988). Journal o f Educational Administration, 26 (1), 23-38.

Hoy, W.K. & others (1992). Faculty trust in colleagues: Linking the principal with school effectiveness. Journal o f Research and Development in Education, 26(1) 38-45.

Huang, G. G. (1999). Sociodemographic changes: Promise and problems for rural education, (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 425-048).

Instructional Leadership and Development Program (1988). Instructional Climate Inventory Form T Manual, 1-9. Champaign, Illinois: MetriTech, Inc.

106



Jacobson, S. L. (1989). Pay incentives and teacher absence: One district’s experiences. Urban Education, 23, 377-391.

Johnson, S.M. & Kardos, S.M. (2002). Keeping new teachers in mind. Educational Leadership, 59 (6), 12-16.

Kelly, B.E. & Bredeson, P.V. (1991). Measures of meaning in a public and in a parochial school. Journal o f Educational Administration, 29 (3), 6-22.

Kelley, C.(1999). The motivational impact of school-based performance awards. Journal o f Personnel Evaluation in Education. 12 (4), 309-326.

Kirby, P.C. & Colbert, R. (1994). Principals who empower teachers. Journal o f School Leadership, 4 (1), 39-51.

Kirby, P.C., Paradise, L.V., & King, M. L. (1992) Extraordinary leaders in education: Understanding transformational leadership. Journal o f Educational Research, 85{5), 303-311.

Klauke, A. (1989). Coping with changing demographics. U.S. Oregon, Eric Digest Series (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. EA45).

Kochan, F. K. & Spencer, W. A. (1999). Preparing leaders for tomorrow’s schools; the practitioners’ perspectives. Research in the schools, 6(1), 9-16.

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B. (1993) Credibility. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Kouzes, J. & Posner, B., (1995). The leadership challenge. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Krug, S.E. (1993). Test - retest stability of school instructional climate measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 77, 858.

Lankard, B.A. (1994). Recruitment and retention o f minority teachers in vocational education. Columbus: Eric Clearinghouse in Adult Career, and Vocational Education. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED368 889).

Laub, A. (1998). Isolation in the secondary school as a predictor of teacher burnout: Role conflict, job satisfaction (Doctoral dissertation. State University of New York at Albany, \99^). Dissertation Abstracts International, 5P, 04A-1027.

Leithwood, K.A. & others (1990). The nature causes and consequences of principals’practices: An agenda for future research. Journal o f Educational Administration, 28(4), 5-31.

107



Lewis, J., Jr. (1982). Using a computer to monitor teacher absenteeism can save schools money and increase the time teachers spend in class. American School Board Journal, 169 (9), 30-32.

Leithwood, K., & Jantzi, D. (1999). The relative effects of principal and teacher sources of leadership in student engagement with school. Educational Administrative Quartely, 34 (2); 243-276.

Leithwood, K., Lawrence, L. & Sharratt, L. (1998). Conditions fostering organizational learning in schools. Educational Administration Quarterly, 34 (2), 243-276.

Little, J.W. (1982). Norms of collegiality an experimentation: workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19 (3), 325-340.

Littledyke, M. (1997). Managerial style, the national curriculum and teachers’ culture: Responses to educational change in a primary school. Educational Research, 39 (3), 243-262.

Madsen, J. (1997). Leadership in decentralized schools. Journal o f School Leadership, 72 (7), 111-137.

Madsen, J. & Hipp, K.A. (1999). The impact of leadership style in creating community in public and private schools. International Journal o f Educational Reform, 6 (3), 260- 273.

Mantle-Bramley,C., Gould,L. & McWhorten, B. (2000). The effect of program structure on new teachers’ employment and program satisfaction patterns. Action in Teacher Education. 22 (I), 1-14.

Marks, H. M. & Louis, K. S. (1999). Teacher empowerment and the capacity for organizational learning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35, 707-750.

Marlow, L., Inman, D., Betancourt-Smith (1997). Beginning teacher’s: Are they still leaving the profession? The Clearing House, 7 (4), 211-214.

Martin and Miller (1986).

McEvoy, B. (1987). Everyday acts: How principals influence development of their staffs. Educational Leadership, 44 (5), 73-77.

Metzke, L. K. (1989). A study of the cause of teacher attrition in regular and special education in Wisconsin. (Doctoral dissertation, Marquette University, 1988). Dissertation Abstracts International, 50,42-A

108



Mitchell, D. E., & Tucker, S. (1992). Leadership as a way of thinking. Educational Leadership, 49 (5), 30-38.

National Education Goals Panel (1992). The national educational education goals report 1992: building a nation of learners. District of Columbia: Washington D.C. Publication.

Norris, J. H. (1998). Teaching styles of publicly recognized rural teachers. Rural Educator, 19 (3), 39-42.

Oakley, E. & Krug, D. (1991). Enlightened Leadership: Getting to the Heart o f Change. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Owens, R. G. (1991/ Organizational Behavior in Education. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Pawar, B. S. & Eastman, K. K. (1997). The nature and implications of contextualinfluences on transformational leadership: A eonceptual examination. The Academy o f Management Review, 22 (1), 8-109.

Pellicer, L. O. (1984). Job Satisfaction: It’s impact upon teacher attendanee. Journal o f the National Association o f Secondary School Principals, 68 (4), 44-47.

Pielstick, C.D. (1998). The transformating leader: A meta-ethnographie analysis. Community College Review, 26 (3), 15-34.

Pitkoff, E. (1981). In search of ways to reduce unneeessary teaeher absenteeism. U.S. New York, ED207180.

Reitzug, U. C. (1994). A ease study of empowering principal behavior. American Educational Research Journal, 31{2), 39-55.

Rinehart, J. S., Short, P.M., Short, R. J., & Eekley, M. (1998). Teacher empowerment and principal leadership: understanding the influenee process. Educational Administrative Quarterly, 34, 630-649.

Rosenholtz, S. (1989a/ The teacher’s workplace. New York: Longmans.

Rosenholtz, S. (1989b). Workplaee conditions that affect teacher quality andcommitment: implieations for teacher induetion programs. The Elementary School Journal, 89,421-439.

Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

109


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CLfLTURE

Schweiker-Marra, K.E. (1995). The principal’s role in changing school culture and implementing school reform. ERS Spectrum, 75 (3), 3-11.

Scott, K.D. & Taylor, G. S. (1985). An examination of the conflicting finds between job satisfaction and absenteeism: A meta- analysis. Academy o f Management Journal 28, 599-612.

Scott, K.D. & Wimbush, J.C. (1991). Teacher absenteeism in secondary education. Educational Administration Quarterly, 27 (4), 506-529.

Scribner, J. P., Cockrell, K. S., Cockrell, D. H., Valentine, J.W. (1999). Creatingprofessional communities in schools through organizational learning: An evaluation of a school improvement process. Educational Administration Quarterly, 35 (1), 130-160.

Sebring, P.B. & Bryk, A.S. (2000). School Leadership and the Bottom Line in Chicago. Phi Delta Kappan, 81 (6), 440-443.

Sergio vanni, T. J. (1980). The New School Executive: A theory o f administration. New York: Harper and Row.

Sergiovanni, T. (1991). The principalship: A reflective practice perspective. MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Shindorf, B., Graham, M. W., & Messner, P. E. (1998). Teacher perception ofempowerment in traditional and non - traditional elementary schools. Catalyst for Change, 28 (1), 23-26.

Silins, H. C. (1994). The relationship between transformational and transactional leadership and school improvement outcomes. School Effectiveness and School Improvements, 5 (3), 272-298.

Simon, C.H. (1980). Changes in organizational climate as perceived by nonreassigned teachers on desegregated elementary school staffs (Doctoral dissertation University of California, Los Angeles, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 01A - 0045.

Slater, M.D. (1980). The teacher drops out - Oregon teacher attrition, 1974-1979. (Doctoral dissertation. University of Oregon, 1980). Dissertation Abstracts International, 41, 08A-3335.

Smith, P.L. (1994). Lessons learned: NASSP’s alliance for developing school leaders. NASSP Bulletin, 75(559), 18-20.

110



Snyder, D. (1984). The strategic context o f education in America, 1985-1995.Washington, D. C. National Education Association. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED294-790).

Spaulding, A. (1997). Life in schools - a qualitative study of teachers perspectives on the politics of principals: Ineffective leadership behaviors and their consequences upon teacher thinking and behavior. School Leadership and Management, 77(1), 39-55.

Tabachnick and Fidell (1989). Using multivariate statistics (2"** Ed.). California State University North; Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc.

Tarter, J.C. & others (1995). Middle school climate, faculty trust, and effectiveness: A path analysis. Journal o f Research and Development in Education, 29 {\), 41-49.

Thomas, C. & Fitzhugh-Walker, P. (1988, July-Sept). InternationalJournal o f Leadership, Education 3, 297-306.

Tichy, N.M. & Devanna, M. A. (1986). The transformational leader. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Tishler,W. & Ernest, B. (1987,). Sources of stress for teachers. Paper presented at Mid- South Educational Research Association, Bill Publication. U. S. Alabama, ED 288851.

Ulriksen, J.J. (1996). Perceptions of secondary school teachers and principalsconcerning factors related to job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction (motivation, attrition). (Doctoral dissertation. University of Southem California, 1996). Dissertation Abstracts International, 58, 01 A -0127

Vandehey, L. T. (1981). Early attrition: Background data and professional concerns of teachers who leave the profession. (Doctoral dissertation, Oregon State University, \9^\). Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 04A-1384

Van Den Berg, R. & Sleegers, P. (1996). The innovative capacity of secondary schools: A qualitative study. International Journal o f Qualitative Studies in Education, 9(2), 201-223.

VanderStoep, S. W. Anderman, E. M. 8c Midgley, C. (1994). The relationship among principals “venturesomeness” a stress on exeellence and the personal engagement of teachers and students. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7 (3), 229- 251.

Vaughn, M.A. (1995). Organization symbols: An analysis of their types and functions in a reborn organization. Management Communication Quarterly, 9 (2), 219-250.

I l l



Waldman, D. A., Bass, B. M. & Einstein, W. A. (1987). Leadership and outcomes of performance appraisal processes. Journal o f Occupational Psychology, 60, n i n e .

Webb, R. & Vulliamy, G. (1996). The changing role of the primary -school headteaeher. Educational Management & Administration, 24 (3), 301-315.

Weick, K. E. & Westley ,E. (1996). Organizational learning: Affirming an oxymoron. In S.R. Clegg, C. hardy, and W. R. Nord (Eds.), Handbook o f organization studies, 440-458. CA: Sage.

Weiss, C.H., Camboune, J. & Wyeth, A. (1992). Trouble in paradise: Teacher conflicts in shared decision making. Educational Administration Quarterly, 28 (3), 350-367.

Weiss, E.M. (1999). Perceived workplace conditions and first year teachers morale, career choice commitment and planned retention: A secondary analysis. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15 (8), 861-879.

Weiss, E.M.& Weiss, S. G., (1999). Beginning teacher induction. Erie Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. Washington, D.C., ED436487.

Zellman, G. L. & Waterman, J. M. (1998). Understanding the impact of parent school involvement on children’s educational outcomes. Journal o f Educational Research, 91 (6), 370-380.

Zhu, Y., Chen, I., Warner, M. (2000). HRM in Tiawan: An empirical ease study. Human Resource Management Journal, 10 (4), 32-44.

112


TRANSFORNlAtSEfl^M; LEADERSHIP A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

APPENDICES

113


TRANSFORMATIONAL L E A m R SH IP AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

APPENDIX A

PERMISSION TO USE THE LPI

114



KOUZES POSNER INTERNATIONAL15419 Banyan Lane

Monte Serene, California 95030 Phone/FAX; (408)354-9170

November 18,2002

Ms. M. Patricia Howard 220 Lynwood Drive Battle Creek, Michigan 49015

Dear Patricia:

Thank you for your request to use the Leadership Practices Inventory ( LPI) in your dissertatbn. We are willing to allow you to reproduce the instrument as outlined in your letter, at no charge, with the following understandings:

(1) That the LPI is used only for research purposes and is not sold or used in conjunction with any compensated management development activities;(2) That copyright of the LPI, or any derivation of the instalment, is retained by Kouzes Posner International, and that the following copyright statement be included on all copies of the instrument: "Copyright ® 1997 James M. Kouzes and Barry Z. Posner. All rights reserved. Used with permission.**;(3) That one <1) bound copy of your dissertation and one (1) copy of all papers, reports, articles, and the like which make use of the LPI data be sent promptly to our attention; and,(4) That you agree to allow us to Include an abstract of your thesis and any other published papers utilizing the LPI on our various websites.

if the terms outlined above are acceptable, would you indicate so by signing one (1) copy of this letter and retuming it to us. Best wishes for every success virith your research project.

Coi

Barry Z. •, Ph.D.

I understand and agree to abide by these conditions:

(Signed),

115



APPENDIX B

MICHIGAN EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION (MEA) INSTRUCTIONAL PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (PDI) CONFERENCE EXHIBITOR’S LETTER

116



11/2S/2002 11:39 5173364013 MEA PD/HR DEPT.: page 02

li chigan iSdiicatiott Assot^^1216KeDdakBlvd,POBok2573 " " 'EostUanng, MI 48826-2S73 517/332-6551 8O0W92-D34 www.me9-<xg

To: IPD Confiaonce Exhibitors

Frun; NfidbdUe Boenna, Exhibits Assistant

Date: Novembw'26,2002

Re; IPD Conference

The.2002 MEA JEnstmction and Professionid Develoênt Conferaoce is apptoaddng i)uicldy and I woiold like to pass OR a few last details to you.

At dbis ptdttt 3 00 ^ u ld have received, eitiier by email or l&x, a packet of infonnaiioa fi«»ndw exhibit con ^ y.; A g ^ you Qidy need to fiU out aigr o f these finnu if

ybvrwodut like additi<a»l equipment or if ym -wodd like to have your booth wmtegais aidpped to die conftretiee (all materiab need to be shipped to Freeman, not die Hyatt).

Thank you to dim« of you Miohayereipcêd about dborptizes before die deadline. Ifyou will not be present to award your prize yootseli you will need to get your prize to me by Friday at2:00pm.

1 will have name badges for you as wril aslyour meal tidcets at a table in die Great Lakes Center sriKtt you arrive tm Thursday. Aldiough 4^ exhibits company will sdU be woridng in the room, you udE be sble to begin your own set-up jd 10 atn, Thursday motniag. Again dwcofolWt times are 1:00 to TdlOoaTteindfy and 9:00 to 400 on Friday. There will be a security gUardpteseot finm 8 am to 1 pm on Thursday and from 7 pm Thursday n i^ to 9 am iMday morning.

If you have not conpleted your payment jSjir your booth, we need to have the ooinplete payment in hand bedne die cêrence begins. Weiappreciate your ptmnptness in dds matter.

Surw^ for Elemontaiy Teachecs your booth number is 28. We look forward to seeing you next week.

MRB

117



APPENDIX C

PROMOTION FLYER FOR RAFFLE PRIZES

118



^ ren rio n flenenrol'y Teochelrz

WINA jFK£E'27 inch Color TV

or

A FREEJSSTD PlayerSimply take a few iniimtes to fill out a

survey to enter the drawing.

The simreys ai« Icx ated at Ixxith niuuber 28 in the Great Lakes Center diiiing the exhibit tiines on

Thursday and Friday.

Fidk one up, find a ccnnfcxrtable, private space, and return it to booth 28.

A name w ill be drawn and posted by the door at the Good Win/Good Cheer Rec:eptlon Friday evening. Step

by the reception to see if you won!

119



APPENDIX D

HSIRB APPROVAL#!

120



W e s t e r n M i c h i g a n u n i v e r s i t yHumm SHblMti InttttntloMl Rwitw Itird

Celebration

Date: November 26,2002

To Charles Warfield, Principal Investigator M. Patricia Howard, Student Investigator for dissertation

Re: HSmB Project Number 02-11-16 /

From: Mary Lagerwey, Chair

This letter will serve as confirmation that your research project entitled “A Study o f the Relationship Between Transformational Leadership and Oqiwizational Culture in Schools" has been approved under the exempt category o f review by tibe Homan Subjects btstittttional Review Board. The conditions and duration o f tins qiproval are specified in the Policies of Western Michigan University. You may now begin to implement the research as described in the ^plicatiotL

Please note that you may only conduct this research exactly in the form it was qiprpved. You must seek qiecific board reproval for any changes in this project. You must also seek rei^proval if the project extends beyond the termination date noted below. In addition if Hiierc are any unanticipated adverse reactions or unanticipated events associated with tiie conduct of this research, you should immediately suspend the project and contact the Chair o f the H S IR B for consultation.

The Board wishes you success in the pursuit o f your research goals.

Approval Termination: November 26,2003

moK>(si«n74tit mmvw-wt

121



APPENDIX E

HSIRB APPROVAL #2

122



W e s t e r n M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t yHumm S ub jw ts InttttuHoM l Ruiritw B urd

-entehniaT 1903-2003 Celebrati on

Date; May 27,2003

To: Charles Warfield, Principal InvestigatorM. Patricia HCward, Student Investigator for dissertation

From: MaiyLagerwey, Chair P \jO-—-j

Re: HSIRB Project Number; 02-11-16

This letter will serve as confirmation that the changes to your research project “A Study o f die Relationship Between Transforaiational Leadership and Oiganizational Culture in Schools” requested in your memo dated May 9, 2003 and clarified on May 23, 2003 (recruiting subjects from WMU classes) have been approved by the Human Subjects Institutional Review Board.

The conditions and the duration of this approval are specified in the Policies o f Western Michigan Uruversity.

Please note diat you may only conduct this research exactly in the form it was qiproved. You must seek specific board approval for any changes in this prqject. You must also seek resqipioval if die project extends beyond the termination date noted below, fit addition if diete are any unanticipated adverse reactions or unanticipated events associated widi the conduct of this resMrch, you should immediately suspend die project and contact the Chair o f the HSIRB for consultation. ^

The Board w i^es you success in the pursuit of your research goals.

Approval Termination: November 26,2003

Wainmd (Ml. Kdamaiio. Ml 490M-S4St PHOK (2S9)3t7-St93 mb (20) M7-1Z7C

123



APPENDIX F

HSIRB APPROVAL #3

124



W E S T E R N M i c h i g a n U n i v e r s i t yHumtn SulN w tt InttltmiBiwI HwHwr l » i r t

e n tc n n la l >*»*J003Ce|ebfal!on

D a t e ; M a r c h 1 0 , 2 0 0 3

To; Charles Warfield, Principal InvestigatorM. Patricia Howard, Student Investigator for dissertation

From: Maty Lt gerwey, Chair / H

Re: HSIRB Project Numher: 02*11-16

This letter will serve as confim»tion that the changes to your research ]»oject **A Study of the Relationship Bmween Trarufomiationa! Leadership and Organizational Culture in Sdiools’* requested in your memo dated February 9,2003 and revised on February 17,19,28, and March 3 have been iqiproved by fiie Human Subjects Institutional Review Board.

The conditiffiDS and fiie duration of this approval are specified in the Policies o f Western Midhigan Uhivenity.

Please note fiut you may onlh' conduct dtis research exactly in the form it was iq^ttoved. You must seek specific board ^ ro v a l for any changes in this project You must also seek reapptoval if the project extmds beyond the termination date noted below, fir addition if there are any unanticiiwted adverse reactions or unanticipated evoits associated with the conduct of fills research, you sihould immediately suspoid fite project and contact fiie Chair o f the HSIRB finconsttlfidion.

The Board wislMS you success in the pursuit of your research goals.

An»ovaI Termination: November 26,2003

WilMOd HiH, KlImMM, M 4MM44Wmm, ( 2 6 i ) n ;4 » 3 M ia«9)U 7-l27(

125



APPENtilX G

LEADERSHIP PRACTICES INVENTORY (LPI)

126



To what extent does this person typically engage in the following behaviors? Choose the number that best applies to each statement aiid record it in the blank to the left of the statement.

I 1 3 4Al most Rarely Seldom Once N ever In a While

He or She:

S 6 7 8 9 . 10Occasionally Sometimes Fairly Usually W ry Almost

Often Frequently Always

I.5

I

£1gO

_ 1. Seeks out challenging opportunities that test his or her owii skills and abilities.

_ 2. Talks about future trends that will influence how our work gets done._ 3. Dwelops cooperative relationships among the people he or she works

with._ 4. Sets a personal example of what he or she expects from others._ 5. Praises people for a job Well done._ 6. Challenges people to try out new and innovative approaches to their

work.

_ 7. DesoibM a compelling image of what our future could be like._ 8. Actively listens to diverse points of view.

_ 9. Spends time and energy on making certain that the people he or she works with adhere to the principles and standards that have been agreed on.

_ 10. Makes it a point to let people know about his or her confidence in their abilities.

_ 11. Searches outside the formal boundaries of his or her organization for innovative ways to improve what we do.

_ 12., A.ppeals to others to share an exciting dream of the. future._ 13. Treats others with dignity and respect._ 14. Follows throu^ on the promises and commitments that he or she

makes.

- 15. Makes sure that people are creatively rewarded for their contributions to the success of projects.

127



I 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10Abnott lUrcly Seldom Once Cccaslonally Sometimes Fairly Usually Very AlmostNever In a While Often Frequently Always

He or She: 16. Asks “What can we leam?” when things do not go as expected. 17. Shows others how their long-term interests can be realized by enlist

ing in a common vision. 18. Supports the decisions that people make on their own. 19. is clear about his or her philosophy of leadership. 20. PubUcfy recognizes people who exemplify commitment to shared values. 21. Experiments and takes risks even when there is a chance of failure.

22, Is contagiously enthusiastic and positive about future possibilities.

23. Gives people a great deal of freedom and choice in deciding how todo their work.

24. Makes certain that we set achievable goals, make concrete plans, andestablish measurable milestones for the projects and programs that we work on.

__ , 25. Finds ways to celebrate accomplishments. 26. Takes the initiative to overcome obstacles even when outcomes are

uncertain.N ____ 27. Speaks with genuine conviction about the higher meaning and

purpose of our work.

I ____ 28. Ensures that people grow in their jobs by learning new skills anddeveloping themselves.

29. Makes progress toward goals one step at a time. -

30. Gives the members of the team lots of appreciation and support fortheir contributions.

128


TRANSFORMATIONAL L E A D E R S t# A N D ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

APPENDIX H

INTRUCTIONAL CLIMATE INVENTORY

129



INSTRUCTIONAL

CLIMATE

INVENTORY

FORM T

130


TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP A ND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE

INSTRUCTIONS

This questionnaire is designed to provide a profile o f instructional leadership and school climate. Your responses are anonymous and will be kept confidential. At no time w ill individual responses be shared with your principal. Your answers w ill be combined with those o f others in order to develop a composite profile. There are no “right” or “wrong” answers and no time limit, but try to answer each question as quickly as possible.

First, take out the answer sheet you have been given. Use the “P” grid under SPECIAL CODES to code in the level o f your school as follows;

3; Elementary4: Junior High or Middle School 5: Senior High

The rest o f the identification area may be left blank.

The booklet has two parts, each with its own instructions .B e sure to read these instructions before answering the items. Use the key at the top of each page to select your answers.

Remember to mark all your answers on the answer sheet with a pencil (No. 2 is best). If you decide to change an answer, erase the first mark completely.

Thank you for your cooperation

132



PART I

The following items deal with views you have about the school in which you’re now employed and various career opportunities. Choose just one answer for each item. Use the following key to choose your answers.

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E)Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree StronglyDisagree Agree

1. . My co-workers and I work well together.2. Disagreements occur here because people frequently compete with each other.3. I get rewarded in a fair way for the work I do.4. I do my best work here because my co-workers urge me to do so.5. In this school we believe in what w e’re doing.6. I f e e l l get sufficient pay for the work I do.7. Employees here receive a lot o f attention.8. This school makes me feel like I’m a winner.9. I like what I’m doing now, so I don’t think of doing anything else.

10. I like my chances o f doing good Work here so I can get ahead.

11. I have a sense of loyalty to this school.12. People spend a lot o f time trying to get to know those in powerful positions in this

school.13. I identify with this school.14. In this school, there is respect for each individual.15. I’m satisfied with the opportunities I have to direct others.16. I think about the future of this school.17. There are many chances to compete with others to get ahead.18. Everyone in this school knows what it stands for.19. In this school we hear more about what people do right than the inistakes they make.20. Communication within this school is very informal and frequent.

21. I’m doing the kind of work I want.22. People at all levels of this school share information about how well it is doing.23. This school stresses excellence.24. I enjoy working with those to whom I report.25. I’m involved in decisions that directly affect my future.26. Employees here are afraid to make a mistake.27. There is peer pressure here to do a good job.28. This school makes me feel like I’m an important, productive person.29. Around here w e’re encouraged to try new things,30. This school is clear about what it expects from me,

31. Evaluations o f my work are directly tied to how well I do.32. There’s a close knit feeling among us in this school.33. I’ve regretted that I chose to work for this school.34. Employees here don’t really trust one another.35. Almost everyone has similar values and ideas about what this school should be doing.36. This school allows me to do things that I find personally satisfying.37. Competition among teachers/departments is actively encouraged in this school.38. This school really cares about me as a person.3 9 .. I know what this school stresses.40. In this school, w e’re encouraged to try new things.

133



(A) (B) (C) (D) (E)Strongly Disagree Uncertain Agree StronglyDisagree, ^ Agree

41. I do extra work here because I want this school to succeed.42. I like the people I work with.43. I enjoy the kind of work I do.44. I know what really counts around here.45. People here are always getting awards and extra attention by doing good work.46. We’re treated as adults in this school.47. Every person in this school can invent, create, and solve.48. The school administration regards conflict among competing work groups and individuals

as healthy.49. I feel that I share in the successes and failures o f this school.50. I regularly receive information about the quality o f my work.

51. There are many incentives here to work hard.52. I have good job security in this school.53. The administration o f this school expects us to be productive in our work.54. I feel a sense o f ownership in this school.55. I’m encouraged to make suggestions about how we can be more effective.56. It would take very little for me to move to another school.57. I take pride in being a part o f this school.58. The emphasis here is on letting us compete and see who ends up the winner.59. Everyone employed in this school knows what we value the most.60. If someone has a good idea or project, the administration listens and supports it.

Sex(A) Male(B) Female

Age(A) Less than 30

„ (B ) 30 to 39(C) 40 to 49(D) 50 to 59(E) 60 or older

Ethnic background(A) White(B) Black(C) Hispanic(D) Asian(E) Other

W Years of teaching experience(A) 0 to 3 years(B) 4 to 6 years(C) 7 to 9 years(D) 10 to 12 years(E) more than 12 years

5 5 Highest degree earned(A) Bachelor's degree(B) Master's degree(C) Educational specialist (6-year

program or equivalent)(D) Doctoral degree

66. Please estimate school size(A) 0-249 students(B) 250-499 students(C) 500 or more students

67. Worked at current building(A) 1-2 years(B) 3 years or more

134


A Study of the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture

Documents

Transcript of A Study of the Relationship between Transformational Leadership and Organizational Culture